Neut. SuperHyperEdges

Neut.
SuperHyperEdges
Ideas | Approaches | Accessibility | Availability
Dr. Henry Garrett

Report | Exposition | References | Research #22 2022
Abstract
In this book, there are two chapters “Initial Notions” and “Modified Notions”
about some researches on SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyper-
Graph based on neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges.
In the first chapter, based on neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in

neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG), I introduce some neutrosophic no-
tions. I define different types of neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE),
neutrosophic SuperHyperPath (NSHP), stable (k-number/dual/perfect/total)
(SuperHyperResolving/SuperHyperDominating) number, connected (k-
number/dual/perfect/total) (SuperHyperResolving/SuperHyperDominating)
number, (-/stable/connected) (-/dual/total) perfect (SuperHyperResolving/Su-
perHyperDominating) set, general forms of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph
(NSHG), p neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (pNSHG), x neutrosophic SuperHy-
perGraph (xNSHG), and t-norm neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (tNSHG) with
related characterizations. Also, I formalize restricted status of neutrosophic
classes of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG). Basic neutrosophic notions
concerning hugely diverse types of neutrosophic SuperHyperDominating and
hugely diverse types of neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in neutrosophic
SuperHyperGraph are introduced. Hugely diverse types of general forms
of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are discussed. Hugely diverse types of
neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges are defined. Different neutrosophic notions are
assigned to neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths. Restricted status of neutrosophic
classes of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs are presented. Different types of
neutrosophic strengths and cardinalities are used. Further directions about
some types of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs are summarized.
In the second chapter, in this research article, the notions of SuperHyperDom-

inating and SuperHyperResolving are defined in the setting of neutrosophic
SuperHyperGraphs. Some ideas are introduced on both notions of SuperHy-
perDominating and SuperHyperResolving, simultaneously and as the same
with each other. Some neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses are defined based on
the notion, SuperHyperResolving. The terms of duality, totality, perfectness,
connectedness, and stable, are added to basic framework and initial notions,
SuperHyperDominating and SuperHyperResolving but the concentration is
on the “perfectness” to figure out what’s going on when for all targeted
SuperHyperVertices, there’s only one SuperHyperVertex in the intended set.
There are some instances and some clarifications to make sense about what’s
i
Abstract
happened and what’s done in the starting definitions. The key point is about
the minimum sets. There are some questions and some problems to be taken
as some avenues to pursue this study and this research. A basic familiarity
with SuperHyperGraph theory and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph theory are
proposed.
The following references are cited by chapters.
[Ref1] Henry Garrett, “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning Neutrosophic

SuperHyperDominating and Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in Neutrosophic
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29173.86244).
[Ref2] Henry Garrett, “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to

Study Some Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge
(NSHE) in Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi:
10.13140/RG.2.2.25385.88160).
Some studies and researches about neutrosophic graphs, are proposed as

book in the following by Henry Garrett (2022) which is indexed by Google
Scholar and has more than 1850 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Beyond Neutro-
sophic Graphs” and published by Ohio: E-publishing: Educational Publisher
1091 West 1st Ave Grandview Heights, Ohio 43212 United State. This research
book covers different types of notions and settings in neutrosophic graph theory
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph theory.
[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).
Also, some studies and researches about neutrosophic graphs, are proposed
as book in the following by Henry Garrett (2022) which is indexed by Google
Scholar and has more than 2534 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Neutrosophic
Duality” and published by Florida: GLOBAL KNOWLEDGE - Publishing
House 848 Brickell Ave Ste 950 Miami, Florida 33131 United States. This
research book presents different types of notions SuperHyperResolving and
SuperHyperDominating in the setting of duality in neutrosophic graph theory
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph theory. This research book has scrutiny
on the complement of the intended set and the intended set, simultaneously.
It’s smart to consider a set but acting on its complement that what’s done in
this research book which is popular in the terms of high 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).
In this book, there are two chapters “Initial Notions” and “Modified Notions” about
some researches on SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on
neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges.
ii
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.
iii
Contents
Abstract i
Acknowledgements iii
Contents v
List of Figures vii
List of Tables ix
1 Initial Notions 1
1.1 Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.3 Preliminaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.4 General Forms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) . . 4
1.5 Relations of Single Valued Neutrosophic Graph and Single
Valued Neutrosophic HyperGraph With Neutrosophic Super-
HyperGraph (NSHG) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.6 Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) . . . . . . . 7
1.7 Types of Neutrosophic Notions Based on Different neutrosophic
SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1.8 Classes of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs (NSHG) . . . . . 17
1.9 Further Directions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Bibliography 25
1.10 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
1.11 Preliminaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
1.12 General Forms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph . . . . . . . 28
1.13 Relations of Single Valued Neutrosophic Graph and Single
Valued Neutrosophic HyperGraph With Neutrosophic Super-
HyperGraph . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
1.14 Types of SuperHyperEdges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
1.15 Types of Notions Based on Different SuperHyperEdges . . . . 33
1.16 Classes of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs . . . . . . . . . . 41
1.17 Further Directions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Bibliography 49
v
Contents
2 Modified Notions 51
2.1 Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
2.2 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
2.3 The Setting of The Neutrosophic SuperHyperDominating . . . 62
2.4 The Setting of Maximum Number of The Neutrosophic Stable
Perfect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
2.5 The Setting of Maximum Number of The Neutrosophic Dual
Perfect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
2.6 The Setting of Minimum Number of The Neutrosophic Notions 70
2.7 The Setting of Minimum Number of The Neutrosophic Total
Perfect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
2.8 The Setting of Minimum Number of The Neutrosophic
Connected Perfect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
2.9 The Setting of The Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving . . . . 73
2.10 Some Results on Neutrosophic Classes Via Minimum Super-
HyperDominating Set . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
2.11 Minimum SuperHyperDominating Set and Minimum Perfect
SuperHyperDominating Set . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
2.12 Applications in Game Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
2.13 Open Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
2.14 Conclusion and Closing Remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
Bibliography 95
vi
List of Figures
2.1 A Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph Associated to the Notions of

SuperHyperDominating in the Example (2.3.1) . . . . . . . . . . . 63
SuperHyperResolving in the Example (2.9.1) . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
vii
List of Figures

SuperHyperDominating. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
SuperHyperResolving. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
viii
List of Tables
2.1 The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and

SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph
Mentioned in the Example (2.3.1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
ix
List of Tables

SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 90
SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 92
2.26 A Brief Overview about Advantages and Limitations of this Study 93
x
CHAPTER 1
Initial Notions
The following sections are cited as follows, which is my 90th manuscripts and I
use prefix 90 as numbers before any labelling for items.
[Ref2] Henry Garrett, “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to

Study Some Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge
(NSHE) in Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi:
10.13140/RG.2.2.25385.88160).
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in Neutrosophic

SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)
1.1 Abstract
Based on neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in neutrosophic SuperHy-
perGraph (NSHG), I introduce some neutrosophic notions. I define differ-
ent types of neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE), neutrosophic SuperHy-
perPath (NSHP), stable (k-number/dual/perfect/total) (SuperHyperResolv-
ing/SuperHyperDominating) number, connected (k-number/dual/perfect/total)
(SuperHyperResolving/SuperHyperDominating) number, (-/stable/connected)
(-/dual/total) perfect (SuperHyperResolving/SuperHyperDominating) set, gen-
eral forms of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG), p neutrosophic SuperHy-
perGraph (pNSHG), x neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (xNSHG), and t-norm
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (tNSHG) with related characterizations. Also,
I formalize restricted status of neutrosophic classes of neutrosophic SuperHy-
perGraph (NSHG).
Keywords: Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE), Neutrosophic SuperHy-
perGraph (NSHG).
AMS Subject Classification: 05C17, 05C22
1.2 Background
Dimension and coloring alongside domination in neutrosophic hypergraphs in
Ref. [Ref11] by Henry Garrett (2022), three types of neutrosophic alliances
based on connectedness and (strong) edges in Ref. [Ref14] by Henry Garrett
(2022), properties of SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph in
Ref. [Ref12] by Henry Garrett (2022), are studied. Also, some studies and
1
1. Initial Notions
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 780 readers in Scribd; in Ref. [Ref13] by Henry Garrett (2022) which is
indexed by Google Scholar and has more than 1400 readers in Scribd.
In this section, I use two subsections to illustrate a perspective about the
background of this study.
1.3 Preliminaries
Definition 1.3.1 (Neutrosophic Set). (Ref.[2],Definition 2.1,p.87).
Let X be a space of points (objects) with generic elements in X denoted by x;
then the neutrosophic set A (NS A) is an object having the form
A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}

+
where the functions T, I, F : X →]− 0, 1 [ define respectively the a truth-
membership function, an indeterminacy-membership function, and a
falsity-membership function of the element x ∈ X to the set A with the
condition
−
0 ≤ TA (x) + IA (x) + FA (x) ≤ 3+ .
The functions TA (x), IA (x) and FA (x) are real standard or nonstandard subsets
+
of ]− 0, 1 [.
Definition 1.3.2 (Single Valued Neutrosophic Set). (Ref.[5],Definition 6,p.2).
Let X be a space of points (objects) with generic elements in X denoted
by x. A single valued neutrosophic set A (SVNS A) is characterized
by truth-membership function TA (x), an indeterminacy-membership function
IA (x), and a falsity-membership function FA (x). For each point x in X,
TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) ∈ [0, 1]. A SVNS A can be written as
A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}.
Definition 1.3.3. The degree of truth-membership, indeterminacy-

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

and FA (X) = min[FA (vi ), FA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈X .
Definition 1.3.4. The support of X ⊂ A of the single valued neutrosophic set
A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}:
supp(X) = {x ∈ X : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) > 0}.
Definition 1.3.5 (Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). (Ref.[4],Definition

3,p.291).
Assume V 0 is a given set. A neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S
is an ordered pair S = (V, E), where
2
1.3. Preliminaries
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued neutrosophic subsets

of V 0 ;
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i =
1, 2, . . . , n);
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued neutrosophic
subsets of V ;
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥
0}, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 );
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n);
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 );
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n);
0 0
P
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n );
0
(ix) and the following conditions hold:
TV0 (Ei0 ) ≤ min[TV 0 (Vi ), TV 0 (Vj )]Vi ,Vj ∈Ei0 ,
IV0 (Ei0 ) ≤ min[IV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vj )]Vi ,Vj ∈Ei0 ,

and FV0 (Ei0 ) ≤ min[FV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vj )]Vi ,Vj ∈Ei0
where i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 .
Here the neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the neutrosophic Supe-

rHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ),
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of indeterminacy-
membership and the degree of falsity-membership the neutrosophic Super-
HyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V.
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the de-
gree of indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the
neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge
(NSHE) E. Thus, the ii0 th element of the incidence matrix of neutrosophic
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the
sets V and E are crisp sets.
Example 1.3.6. (Application in Game Theory).
??????Description, Model(...Table and Figure), Problem, Analysis, Algorithm
??????
Definition 1.3.7 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph
(NSHG)). (Ref.[4],Section 4,pp.291-292).
Assume a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an ordered pair S =
(V, E). The neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vi of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)
S = (V, E) could be characterized as follow-up items.
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex;

(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex;
3
1. Initial Notions
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called
edge;
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called
HyperEdge;
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0
is called SuperEdge;
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0
is called SuperHyperEdge.
1.4 General Forms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph

(NSHG)
If we choose different types of binary operations, then we could get hugely
diverse types of general forms of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG).
Definition 1.4.1 (t-norm). (Ref.[3], Definition 5.1.1, pp.82-83).
A binary operation ⊗ : [0, 1] × [0, 1] → [0, 1] is a t-norm if it satisfies the
following for x, y, z, w ∈ [0, 1]:
(i) 1 ⊗ x = x;
(ii) x ⊗ y = y ⊗ x;
(iii) x ⊗ (y ⊗ z) = (x ⊗ y) ⊗ z;
(iv) If w ≤ x and y ≤ z then w ⊗ y ≤ x ⊗ z.

valued neutrosophic set A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X} (with
respect to t-norm Tnorm ):
TA (X) = Tnorm [TA (vi ), TA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈X ,
IA (X) = Tnorm [IA (vi ), IA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈X ,

and FA (X) = Tnorm [FA (vi ), FA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈X .
A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}:
Definition 1.4.4. (General Forms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)).


of V 0 ;

1, 2, . . . , n);
4
1.5. Relations of Single Valued Neutrosophic Graph and Single Valued
Neutrosophic HyperGraph With Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)
subsets of V ;
0}, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 );
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n);
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 );
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n);
0 0
P
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n ).
0

edge;
HyperEdge;
1.5 Relations of Single Valued Neutrosophic Graph and

Single Valued Neutrosophic HyperGraph With
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)
Definition 1.5.1 (Single Valued Neutrosophic Graph). (Ref.[2],Definition
3.1,p.89).
5
1. Initial Notions
A single valued neutrosophic graph (SVN-graph) with underlying set V is

defined to be a pair G = (A, B) where
(i) The functions TA : V → [0, 1], IA : V → [0, 1], and FA : V → [0, 1] denote
the degree of truth-membership, degree of indeterminacy-membership and
falsity-membership of the element vi ∈ V, respectively, and
0 ≤ TA (vi ) + IA (vi ) + FA (vi ) ≤ 3 for all vi ∈ V (i = 1, 2, . . . , n).
(ii) The functions TB : V × V → [0, 1], IB : V × V → [0, 1], and FB : V × V →

[0, 1] are defined by
TB ({vi , vj }) ≤ min[TA (vi ), TA (vj )],
IB ({vi , vj }) ≤ min[IA (vi ), IA (vj )],

and FB ({vi , vj }) ≤ min[FA (vi ), FA (vj )]
denote the degree of truth-membership, indeterminacy-membership and
falsity-membership of the edge (vi , vj ) ∈ E respectively, where
0 ≤ TB ({vi , vj })+IB ({vi , vj })+FB ({vi , vj }) ≤ 3 for all {vi , vi } ∈ E (i = 1, 2, . . . , n).
We call A the single valued neutrosophic vertex set of V, B the single

valued neutrosophic edge set of E, respectively. Note that B is a symmetric
single valued neutrosophic relation on A. We use the notation (vi , vj ) for an
element of E. Thus, G = (A, B) is a single valued neutrosophic graph of
G∗ = (A, B) if
and FB ({vi , vj }) ≤ min[FA (vi ), FA (vj )] for all (vi , vj ) ∈ E.
Proposition 1.5.2. Let an ordered pair S = (V, E) be a single valued
neutrosophic graph. Then S = (V, E) is a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph
(NSHG) S.
The converse doesn’t hold.
Definition 1.5.3 (Single Valued Neutrosophic HyperGraph). (Ref.[1],Definition
2.5,p.123).
Let V = {v1 , v2 , . . . , vn } be a finite set and E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Em } be a
family of non-trivial single valued neutrosophic subsets of V such that
finite P
V = i supp(Ei0 ), i = 1, 2, 3, . . . , m, where the edges Ei0 are single valued
neutrosophic subsets of V, Ei0 = {(vj , TEi0 (vj ), IEi0 (vj ), FEi0 (vj ))}, Ei0 6= ∅, for
i = 1, 2, 3, . . . , m. Then the pair H = (V, E) is a single valued neutrosophic
HyperGraph on V, E is the family of single-valued neutrosophic HyperEdges
of H and V is the crisp vertex set of H.
Proposition 1.5.4. Let an ordered pair S = (V, E) be single valued neutrosophic
HyperGraph. Then S = (V, E) is a type of general forms of neutrosophic
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S.
The converse doesn’t hold.
6
1.6. Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)
1.6 Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)

Definition 1.6.1. Let an ordered pair S = (V, E) be a neutrosophic SuperHy-
perGraph (NSHG) S. Then a sequence of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices
(NSHV) and neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)
V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , . . . , Vs−1 , Es−1 , Vs
is called a neutrosophic SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from neutrosophic

SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V1 to neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV)
Vs if either of following conditions hold:
(i) Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ;
(ii) there’s a vertex vi ∈ Vi such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ;
(iii) there’s a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi such that Vi0 , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ;
(iv) there’s a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ;

0 0
(v) there’s a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ;
(vi) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ;
0
(vii) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that
0
vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ;
(viii) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that
Vi0 , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ;
(ix) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1

0
∈ Vi+1 such that
0 0
Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 .
Definition 1.6.2. (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths).

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

perPath.
7
1. Initial Notions
Definition 1.6.3. (Neutrosophic Strength of the Neutrosophic SuperHyper-

Paths).
S = (V, E). A neutrosophic SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from neutrosophic Su-
perHyperVertex (NSHV) V1 to neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vs
is sequence of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) and neutrosophic
V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , . . . , Vs−1 , Es−1 , Vs ,
have
(i) neutrosophic t-strength (min{T (Vi )}, m, n)si=1 ;
(ii) neutrosophic i-strength (m, min{I(Vi )}, n)si=1 ;
(iii) neutrosophic f-strength (m, n, min{F (Vi )})si=1 ;
(iv) neutrosophic strength (min{T (Vi )}, min{I(Vi )}, min{F (Vi )})si=1 .
Definition 1.6.4. (Different Neutrosophic Types of neutrosophic SuperHy-
perEdges (NSHE)).
(V, E). Consider a neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }.
Then E is called
(i) neutrosophic aT if T (E) = min{T (Vi )}si=1 ;
(ii) neutrosophic aI if I(E) = min{I(Vi )}si=1 ;
(iii) neutrosophic aF if F (E) = min{F (Vi )}si=1 ;
(iv) neutrosophic aTIF if (T (E), I(E), F (E)) = (min{T (Vi )}, min{I(Vi )}, min{F (Vi )})si=1 ;
(v) neutrosophic bT if T (E) = {T (Vi )}si=1 ;
Q
(vi) neutrosophic bI if I(E) = {I(Vi )}si=1 ;

Q
(vii) neutrosophic bF if F (E) = {F (Vi )}si=1 ;

Q
(viii) neutrosophic bTIF if (T (E), I(E), F (E)) = ( {T (Vi )}, {I(Vi )}, {F (Vi )})si=1 ;
Q Q Q
(ix) neutrosophic cT (/ − dT / − eT / − fT / − gT ) if T (E) > (/− ≥ /− =

/− < /− ≤) maximum number of neutrosophic t-strength of SuperHy-
perPath (NSHP) from neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s;
(x) neutrosophic cI (/ − dI / − Ei0 / − fI / − gI ) if I(E) > (/− ≥ /− =
/− < /− ≤) maximum number of neutrosophic i-strength of Super-
HyperPath (NSHP) from neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to
(xi) neutrosophic cF (/ − dF / − eF / − fF / − gF ) if F (E) > (/− ≥ /− =
/− < /− ≤) maximum number of neutrosophic f-strength of SuperHy-
perPath (NSHP) from neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to
8
1.7. Types of Neutrosophic Notions Based on Different neutrosophic
(xii) neutrosophic cTIF (/ − dTIF / − eTIF / − fTIF / − gTIF ) if (T (E), I(E), F (E)) >
(/− ≥ /− = /− < /− ≤) maximum number of neutrosophic strength of
SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV)
Vi to neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s.
1.7 Types of Neutrosophic Notions Based on Different

neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)
Symmetric Neutrosophic Notions
For instance, having neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) and both neutro-
sophic SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) SuperHyperDominate, instantly.
Definition 1.7.1. (Neutrosophic SuperHyperDominating).
S = (V, E). Let D be a set of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) [a
SuperHyperVertex alongside triple pair of its values is called neutrosophic Supe-
rHyperVertex (NSHV).]. If for every neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV)
N in V \ D, there’s at least a neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Di in D
such that N, Di is in a neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) is neutrosophic
aT (−aI /−aF /−aT IF /−bT /−bI /−bF /−bT IF /−. . . /−gT /−gI /−gF /−gT IF )
then the set of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) S is called neutro-
sophic
aT (−aI / − aF / − aTIF / − bT / − bI / − bF / − bTIF / − . . . / − gT / − gI / − gF / − gTIF )
SuperHyperDominating set. The minimum (I-/F-/- -)T-neutrosophic car-
dinality between all neutrosophic aT (−aI / − aF / − aT IF / − bT / − bI / − bF / −
bT IF / − . . . / − gT / − gI / − gF / − gT IF ) SuperHyperDominating sets is called
(I-/F-/- -)T-neutrosophic
SuperHyperDominating number and it’s denoted by
DaT (−aI /−aF /−aT IF /−bT /−bI /−bF /−bT IF /−.../−gT /−gI /−gF /−gT IF ) (N SHG)
where (I-/F-/- -)T-neutrosophic cardinality of the single valued neut-
rosophic set A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}:
X
|A|T = [TA (vi ), TA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈A ,
X
|A|I = [IA (vi ), IA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈A ,
X
|A|F = [FA (vi ), FA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈A ,
X
and |A| = [|A|T , |A|I , |A|F ].
Definition 1.7.2. (Neutrosophic k-number SuperHyperDominating).

SuperHyperVertex alongside triple pair of its values is called neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV).]. If for every neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex
(NSHV) N in V \D, there are at least neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices (NSHV)
D1 , D2 , . . . , Dk in D such that N, Di (i = 1, 2, . . . , k) is in a neutrosophic Supe-
rHyperEdge (NSHE) is neutrosophic aT (−aI / − aF / − aT IF / − bT / − bI / −
9
1. Initial Notions
bF / − bT IF / − . . . / − gT / − gI / − gF / − gT IF ) then the set of neutrosophic

SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) S is called neutrosophic
k-number SuperHyperDominating set. The minimum (I-/F-/- -)T-
neutrosophic cardinality between all neutrosophic aT (−aI / − aF / − aT IF / −
bT /−bI /−bF /−bT IF /−. . . /−gT /−gI /−gF /−gT IF ) SuperHyperDominating
sets is called (I-/F-/- -)T-neutrosophic
k-number SuperHyperDominating number and it’s denoted by
X
X
X
X
and |A| = [|A|T , |A|I , |A|F ].
Definition 1.7.3. (Neutrosophic Dual SuperHyperDominating).

Di in D, there’s at least a neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) N in V \ D,
sophic
dual SuperHyperDominating set. The minimum (I-/F-/- -)T-neutrosophic
cardinality between all neutrosophic aT (−aI / − aF / − aT IF / − bT / − bI / −
bF / − bT IF / − . . . / − gT / − gI / − gF / − gT IF ) SuperHyperDominating sets is
called (I-/F-/- -)T-neutrosophic
dual SuperHyperDominating number and it’s denoted by
X
X
X
X
and |A| = [|A|T , |A|I , |A|F ].
10
Definition 1.7.4. (Neutrosophic Perfect SuperHyperDominating).
N in V \ D, there’s only one neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Di in D
sophic
perfect SuperHyperDominating set. The minimum (I-/F-/- -)T-
perfect SuperHyperDominating number and it’s denoted by
X
X
X
X
and |A| = [|A|T , |A|I , |A|F ].
Definition 1.7.5. (Neutrosophic Total SuperHyperDominating).
N in V, there’s at least a neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Di in D
sophic
total SuperHyperDominating set. The minimum (I-/F-/- -)T-neutrosophic
total SuperHyperDominating number and it’s denoted by
X
11
1. Initial Notions
X
X
X
and |A| = [|A|T , |A|I , |A|F ].
Definition 1.7.6. (Different Types of SuperHyperResolving).

S = (V, E). If d(Ri , N ) 6= d(Ri , N 0 ), then two neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices
(NSHV) N and N 0 are
(i) neutrosophic aT resolved by neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV)

Ri where d(Vi , Vj ) = min{T (Vi ), T (Vj )};
(ii) neutrosophic aI resolved by neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV)

Ri where d(Vi , Vj ) = min{I(Vi ), I(Vj )};
(iii) neutrosophic aF resolved by neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV)

Ri where d(Vi , Vj ) = min{F (Vi ), F (Vj )};
(iv) neutrosophic aTIF resolved by neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex

(NSHV) Ri where d(Vi , Vj ) = (min{T (Vi ), T (Vj )}, min{I(Vi ), I(Vj )}, min{F (Vi ), F (Vj )});
(v) neutrosophic bT resolved

Q by neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV)
Ri where d(Vi , Vj ) = {T (Vi ), T (Vj )};
(vi) neutrosophic bI resolved

Ri where d(Vi , Vj ) = {I(Vi ), I(Vj )};
(vii) neutrosophic bF resolved

Ri where d(Vi , Vj ) = {F (Vi ), F (Vj )};
(viii) neutrosophic aTIF resolved Q by neutrosophic Q SuperHyperVertex

Q
(NSHV) Ri where d(Vi , Vj ) = ( {T (Vi ), T (Vj )}, {I(Vi ), I(Vj )}, {F (Vi ), F (Vj )});
(ix) neutrosophic cT resolved by neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV)

Ri where d(Vi , Vj ) is the maximum number of neutrosophic t-strength of
Vi to neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj ;
(x) neutrosophic cI resolved by neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV)

Ri where d(Vi , Vj ) is the maximum number of neutrosophic i-strength of
(xi) neutrosophic cF resolved by neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV)

Ri where d(Vi , Vj ) is the maximum number of neutrosophic f-strength of
(xii) neutrosophic cTIF resolved by neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex

(NSHV) Ri where d(Vi , Vj ) is the maximum number of neutrosophic
strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from neutrosophic SuperHyperVer-
tex (NSHV) Vi to neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj ;
12
(xiii) neutrosophic dT resolved by neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV)
Ri where d(Vi , Vj ) is the maximum number of degree of truth-membership
of all neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) in SuperHyperPath
(NSHP) with maximum number of neutrosophic t-strength from neutro-
sophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex
(NSHV) Vj ;
(xiv) neutrosophic dI resolved by neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV)
Ri where d(Vi , Vj ) is the maximum number of degree of indeterminacy-
membership of all neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) in SuperHy-
perPath (NSHP) with maximum number of neutrosophic i-strength from
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to neutrosophic SuperHyper-
Vertex (NSHV) Vj ;
(xv) neutrosophic dF resolved by neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV)
Ri where d(Vi , Vj ) is the maximum number of degree of falsity-membership
of all neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) in SuperHyperPath
(NSHP) with maximum number of neutrosophic f-strength from neutro-
sophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex
(NSHV) Vj ;
(xvi) neutrosophic dTIF resolved by neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex
(NSHV) Ri where d(Vi , Vj ) is the maximum number of the triple (de-
gree of truth-membership, degree of indeterminacy-membership, degree
of falsity-membership) of all neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices (NSHV)
in SuperHyperPath (NSHP) with maximum number of neutrosophic f-
strength from neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj ;
(xvii) neutrosophic eT resolved by neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV)
Ri where d(Vi , Vj ) is the maximum number of neutrosophic SuperHy-
perEdges (NSHE) in SuperHyperPath (NSHP) with maximum number of
neutrosophic t-strength from neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi
to neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj ;
(xviii) neutrosophic Ei0 resolved by neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV)
neutrosophic i-strength from neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi
(xix) neutrosophic eF resolved by neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV)
neutrosophic f-strength from neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi
(xx) neutrosophic eTIF resolved by neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex
(NSHV) Ri where d(Vi , Vj ) is the maximum number of neutrosophic
SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) in SuperHyperPath (NSHP) with maximum
number of neutrosophic t-strength, neutrosophic i-strength and neutro-
sophic f-strength from neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj .
13
1. Initial Notions
Definition 1.7.7. (Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving).

S = (V, E). Let R be a set of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices (NSHV)
[a SuperHyperVertex alongside triple pair of its values is called neutro-
sophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV).]. If for every neutrosophic SuperHy-
perVertices (NSHV) N and N 0 in V \ R, there’s at least a neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Ri in R such that N and N 0 are neutrosophic
aT (−aI /−aF /−aT IF /−bT /−bI /−bF /−bT IF /−. . . /−eT /−Ei0 /−eF /−eT IF )
resolved by Ri , then the set of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) S is
called neutrosophic
aT (−aI / − aF / − aTIF / − bT / − bI / − bF / − bTIF / − . . . / − eT / − Ei0 / − eF / − eTIF )
SuperHyperResolving set. The minimum (I-/F-/- -)T-neutrosophic cardin-
ality between all neutrosophic aT (−aI / − aF / − aT IF / − bT / − bI / − bF / −
bT IF / − . . . / − eT / − Ei0 / − eF / − eT IF ) SuperHyperResolving sets is called
SuperHyperResolving number and it’s denoted by
RaT (−aI /−aF /−aT IF /−bT /−bI /−bF /−bT IF /−.../−eT /−Ei0 /−eF /−eT IF ) (N SHG)
X
X
X
X
and |A| = [|A|T , |A|I , |A|F ].
Definition 1.7.8. (Neutrosophic k-number SuperHyperResolving).
S = (V, E). Let R be a set of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) [a
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV).]. If for every neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices
(NSHV) N and N 0 in V \ R, there are at least neutrosophic SuperHyper-
Vertices (NSHV) R1 , R2 , . . . , Rk in R such that N and N 0 are neutrosophic
resolved by Ri (i = 1, 2, . . . , k), then the set of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices
(NSHV) S is called neutrosophic
k-number SuperHyperResolving set. The minimum (I-/F-/- -)T-
bT / − bI / − bF / − bT IF / − . . . / − eT / − Ei0 / − eF / − eT IF ) SuperHyperResolving
k-number SuperHyperResolving number and it’s denoted by
X
14
X
X
X
and |A| = [|A|T , |A|I , |A|F ].
Definition 1.7.9. (Neutrosophic Dual SuperHyperResolving).
perVertices (NSHV) Ri and Rj in R, there’s at least a neutrosophic Su-
perHyperVertex (NSHV) N in V \ R such that Ri and Rj are neutrosophic
called neutrosophic
dual SuperHyperResolving set. The minimum (I-/F-/- -)T-neutrosophic
bF / − bT IF / − . . . / − eT / − Ei0 / − eF / − eT IF ) SuperHyperResolving sets is
dual SuperHyperResolving number and it’s denoted by
X
X
X
X
and |A| = [|A|T , |A|I , |A|F ].
Definition 1.7.10. (Neutrosophic Perfect SuperHyperResolving).
perVertices (NSHV) N and N 0 in V \ R, there’s only one neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Ri in R such that N and N 0 are neutrosophic
called neutrosophic
perfect SuperHyperResolving set. The minimum (I-/F-/- -)T-neutrosophic
15
1. Initial Notions
perfect SuperHyperResolving number and it’s denoted by

X
X
X
X
and |A| = [|A|T , |A|I , |A|F ].
Definition 1.7.11. (Neutrosophic Total SuperHyperResolving).

perVertices (NSHV) N and N 0 in V, there’s at least a neutrosophic Su-
perHyperVertex (NSHV) Ri in R such that N and N 0 are neutrosophic
called neutrosophic
total SuperHyperResolving set. The minimum (I-/F-/- -)T-neutrosophic
total SuperHyperResolving number and it’s denoted by
X
X
X
X
and |A| = [|A|T , |A|I , |A|F ].
Definition 1.7.12. (Neutrosophic Stable and Neutrosophic Connected).

S = (V, E). Let Z be a set of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) [a
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV).]. Then Z is called
(i) stable if for every two neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) in Z,

there’s no SuperHyperPaths amid them;
16
1.8. Classes of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs (NSHG)
(ii) connected if for every two neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) in

Z, there’s at least one SuperHyperPath amid them.
Thus Z is called
(i) stable (k-number/dual/perfect/total) (SuperHyperResolv-

ing/SuperHyperDominating) set if Z is (k-number/dual/perfect/total)
(SuperHyperResolving/SuperHyperDominating) set and stable;
(ii) connected (k-number/dual/perfect/total) (SuperHyperResolv-

(SuperHyperResolving/SuperHyperDominating) set and connected.
A number N is called

ing/SuperHyperDominating) number if its corresponded set Z
is (k-number/dual/perfect/total) (SuperHyperResolving/SuperHyper-
Dominating) set and stable;

ing/SuperHyperDominating) number if its corresponded set Z is
(k-number/dual/perfect/total) (SuperHyperResolving/SuperHyperDom-
inating) set and connected.
Thus Z is called
(i) (-/stable/connected) (-/dual/total) perfect (SuperHyper-

Resolving/SuperHyperDominating) set if Z is (-/stable/connected)
(-/dual/total) perfect (SuperHyperResolving/SuperHyperDominating)
set.

Resolving/SuperHyperDominating) number if its corresponded
set Z is -/stable/connected) (-/dual/total) perfect (SuperHyperResolv-
ing/SuperHyperDominating) set.
Antisymmetric Neutrosophic Notions

For instance, having neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) but neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) with bigger values SuperHyperDominates, instantly.
1.8 Classes of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs (NSHG)

Restricted Status of Classes of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs
(NSHG)
Assume neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 such that there’s a
Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2. Consider µ =
(TV 0 , IV 0 , FV 0 ), µ0 = (TV0 , TI0 , FV0 ).
17
1. Initial Notions
Definition 1.8.1. Assume a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an

ordered pair S = (V, E) and O(N SHG) = |V |. Then
(i) : a sequence of consecutive neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices (NSHV)
(N SHP ) : {x0 }, {x1 }, · · · , {xO(N SHG) } is called neutrosophic Supe-
rHyperPath (NSHP) where
{{xi }, {xi+1 }} ∈ E, i = 0, 1, · · · , O(N SHG) − 1;
(ii) : neutrosophic SuperHyperStrength (NSHH) of neutrosophic Su-

perHyperPath (NSHP) N SHP : {x0 }, {x1 }, · · · , {xO(N SHG) } is
0
V
i=0,··· ,O(N SHG)−1 µ ({{xi }, {xi+1 }});
(iii) : neutrosophic SuperHyperConnectedness (NSHN) amid neutro-

sophic SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) {x0 } and {xt } is
_ ^
N SHN = µ∞ ({x0 }, {xt }) = µ0 ({{xi }, {xi+1 }});
P :{x0 },{x1 },··· ,{xO(N SHG) } i=0,··· ,t−1
(iv) : a sequence of consecutive neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices (NSHV)

N SHP : {x0 }, {x1 }, · · · , {xO(N SHG) }, {x0 } is called neutrosophic
SuperHyperCycle (NSHC) where
{{xi }, {xi+1 }} ∈ E, i = 0, 1, · · · , O(N T G) − 1, {{xO(N T G) }, {x0 }} ∈ E
and there are two neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) {{x}, {y}} and
{{u}, {v}} such that
^
µ0 ({{x}, {y}}) = µ0 ({{u}, {v}}) = µ0 ({{vi }, {vi+1 }});
i=0,1,··· ,n−1
(v) : it’s neutrosophic SuperHyper-t-partite (NSHT) where V is parti-

tioned to t parts, V1s1 , V2s2 , · · · , Vtst and the neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge
s
(NSHE) {{x}, {y}} implies {x} ∈ Visi and {y} ∈ Vj j where i 6= j. If
it’s neutrosophic SuperHyperComplete (NSHM), then it’s denoted by
Kσ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt where σi is σ on Visi instead V which mean {x} 6∈ Vi induces
µi ({x}) = 0. Also, |Vjsi | = si ;
(vi) : neutrosophic SuperHyper-t-partite is neutrosophic SuperHyperBi-
partite (NSHB) if t = 2, and it’s denoted by Kσ1 ,σ2 if it’s neutrosophic
SuperHyperComplete (NSHM);
(vii) : neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite is neutrosophic SuperHyperStar
(NSHS) if |V1 | = 1, and it’s denoted by S1,σ2 ;
(viii) : a neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) in V is neutrosophic Supe-
rHyperCenter (NSHR) if the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV)
joins to all neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) of a neutrosophic Su-
perHyperCycle (NSHC). Then it’s neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel
(NSHW) and it’s denoted by W1,σ2 ;
(ix) : it’s neutrosophic SuperHyperComplete (NSHM) where
∀{u}, {v} ∈ V, µ0 ({{u}, {v}}) = µ({u}) ∧ µ({v});
18
1.9. Further Directions
(x) : it’s neutrosophic SuperHyperStrong (NSHO) where

∀{{u}, {v}} ∈ E, µ0 ({{u}, {v}}) = µ({u}) ∧ µ({v}).
There’s an open way to extend.
1.9 Further Directions

First Direction
(i) 1 ⊗ x = x;
(ii) x ⊗ y = y ⊗ x;
(iii) x ⊗ (y ⊗ z) = (x ⊗ y) ⊗ z;
Definition 1.9.2. (t-norm Single Valued Neutrosophic Graph).
A t-norm single valued neutrosophic graph (tSVN-graph) with underlying
set V is defined to be a pair G = (A, B) where

TB ({vi , vj }) ≤ Tnorm [TA (vi ), TA (vj )],
IB ({vi , vj }) ≤ Tnorm [IA (vi ), IA (vj )],
and FB ({vi , vj }) ≤ Tnorm [FA (vi ), FA (vj )]
falsity- membership of the edge (vi , vj ) ∈ E respectively, where

element of E. Thus, G = (A, B) is a t-norm single valued neutrosophic graph
of G∗ = (A, B) if
and FB ({vi , vj }) ≤ Tnorm [FA (vi ), FA (vj )] for all (vi , vj ) ∈ E.
19
1. Initial Notions

A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}:
Definition 1.9.5. (t-norm Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (tNSHG)).
Assume V 0 is a given set. A t-norm neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph
(tNSHG) S is an ordered pair S = (V, E), where
of V 0 ;
1, 2, . . . , n);
subsets of V ;
0}, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 );
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n);
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 );
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n);
0 0
P
(viii) i0 supp(Ei0 ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n );

TV0 (Ei0 ) ≤ Tnorm [TV 0 (Vi ), TV 0 (Vj )]Vi ,Vj ∈Ei0 ,
IV0 (Ei0 ) ≤ Tnorm [IV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vj )]Vi ,Vj ∈Ei0 ,
and FV0 (Ei0 ) ≤ Tnorm [FV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vj )]Vi ,Vj ∈Ei0
where i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 .
Here the neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej and the neutrosophic Supe-
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the
degree of indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership
of the neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei to the neutrosophic Su-
perHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, the ii0 th element of the incidence mat-
rix of t-norm Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (tNSHG) are of the form
(Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V and E are crisp sets.
20
Second Direction
Definition 1.9.6. (x Single Valued Neutrosophic Graph (xSVN-graph)).
A x single valued neutrosophic graph (xSVN-graph) with underlying set
V is defined to be a pair G = (A, B) where

TB ({vi , vj }) ≤ max[TA (vi ), TA (vj )],
IB ({vi , vj }) ≤ max[IA (vi ), IA (vj )],

and FB ({vi , vj }) ≤ max[FA (vi ), FA (vj )]

element of E. Thus, G = (A, B) is a x single valued neutrosophic graph of
G∗ = (A, B) if
and FB ({vi , vj }) ≤ max[FA (vi ), FA (vj )] for all (vi , vj ) ∈ E.
TA (X) = max[TA (vi ), TA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈X ,
IA (X) = max[IA (vi ), IA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈X ,

and FA (X) = max[FA (vi ), FA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈X .
A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}:
Definition 1.9.9. (x Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (xNSHG)).

Assume V 0 is a given set. A x neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (xNSHG)
S is an ordered pair S = (V, E), where
21
1. Initial Notions

of V 0 ;

1, 2, . . . , n);

subsets of V ;
0}, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 );
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n);
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 );

P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n);
0 0
P
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n );
0
TV0 (Ei0 ) ≤ max[TV 0 (Vi ), TV 0 (Vj )]Vi ,Vj ∈Ei0 ,
IV0 (Ei0 ) ≤ max[IV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vj )]Vi ,Vj ∈Ei0 ,
and FV0 (Ei0 ) ≤ max[FV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vj )]Vi ,Vj ∈Ei0

where i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 .

neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei to the neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge
(NSHE) E. Thus, the ii0 th element of the incidence matrix of x Neutrosophic
SuperHyperGraph (xNSHG) are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the
Third Direction
Definition 1.9.10. (p Single Valued Neutrosophic Graph (pSVN-graph)).
A p single valued neutrosophic graph (pSVN-graph) with underlying set
22

TB ({vi , vj }) ≤ TA (vi ) × TA (vj ),
IB ({vi , vj }) ≤ IA (vi ) × IA (vj ),

and FB ({vi , vj }) ≤ FA (vi ) × FA (vj )

element of E. Thus, G = (A, B) is a p single valued neutrosophic graph of
G∗ = (A, B) if
TB ({vi , vj }) ≤ TA (vi ) × TA (vj ),
IB ({vi , vj }) ≤ IA (vi ) × IA (vj ),
and FB ({vi , vj }) ≤ FA (vi ) × FA (vj ) for all (vi , vj ) ∈ E.
TA (X) = [TA (vi ) × TA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈X ,
IA (X) = [IA (vi ) × IA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈X ,

and FA (X) = [FA (vi ) × FA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈X .
Definition 1.9.12. The crisp subset of X in which all its elements have nonzero
membership degree is defined as the support of the single valued neutrosophic
set A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}:
supp(A) = {x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) > 0}.
Definition 1.9.13. (p Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (pNSHG)).

Assume V 0 is a given set. A p neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (pNSHG)
S is an ordered pair S = (V, E), where
of V 0 ;
1, 2, . . . , n);
subsets of V ;
0}, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 );
23
1. Initial Notions
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n);
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 );
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n);
0 0
P
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n );
0
TV0 (Ei0 ) ≤ [TV 0 (Vi ) × TV 0 (Vj )]Vi ,Vj ∈Ei0 ,
IV0 (Ei0 ) ≤ [IV 0 (Vi ) × IV 0 (Vj )]Vi ,Vj ∈Ei0 ,

and FV0 (Ei0 ) ≤ [FV 0 (Vi ) × FV 0 (Vj )]Vi ,Vj ∈Ei0
where i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 .

neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei to the neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge
(NSHE) E. Thus, the ii0 th element of the incidence matrix of p Neutrosophic
SuperHyperGraph (pNSHG) are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the
24
Bibliography
1 [1] M. Akram et al., “Single-valued neutrosophic Hypergraphs”, TWMS J.

App. Eng. Math. 8 (1) (2018) 122-135.
2 [2] S. Broumi et al., “Single-valued neutrosophic graphs”, Journal of New
Theory 10 (2016) 86-101.
Ref10 [3] Henry Garrett, (2022). “Beyond Neutrosophic Graphs”, Ohio: E-
publishing: Educational Publisher 1091 West 1st Ave Grand-
Ref11 [4] Henry Garrett, “Dimension and Coloring alongside Domination in Neut-
rosophic Hypergraphs”, Preprints 2021, 2021120448 (doi: 10.20944/pre-
prints202112.0448.v1).
Ref12 [5] 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).
Ref13 [6] 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
Ref14 [7] Henry Garrett, “Three Types of Neutrosophic Alliances based on Con-
nectedness and (Strong) Edges”, Preprints 2022, 2022010239 (doi:
10.20944/preprints202201.0239.v1).
3 [8] H.T. Nguyen and E.A. Walker, “A First course in fuzzy logic”, CRC
Press, 2006.
4 [9] F. Smarandache, “Extension of HyperGraph to n-SuperHyperGraph and to
Plithogenic n-SuperHyperGraph, and Extension of HyperAlgebra to n-ary
(Classical-/Neutro-/Anti-) HyperAlgebra”, Neutrosophic Sets and Systems
33 (2020) 290-296. (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.3783103).
5 [10] H. Wang et al., “Single-valued neutrosophic sets”, Multispace and
Multistructure 4 (2010) 410-413.
25
Bibliography
There are some texts in the convenient ways for intended readership which is
about what follows.
The following sections are cited as follows, which is my 89th manuscripts and I
use prefixes 89 as numbers before any labelling for items.
[Ref1] Henry Garrett, “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning Neutrosophic

SuperHyperDominating and Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in Neutrosophic
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29173.86244).
Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning Neutrosophic

SuperHyperDominating and Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving
in Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph
Abstract
Basic neutrosophic notions concerning hugely diverse types of neutrosophic
SuperHyperDominating and hugely diverse types of neutrosophic SuperHyper-
Resolving in neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are introduced. Hugely diverse
types of general forms of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are discussed. Hugely
diverse types of neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges are defined. Different neut-
rosophic notions are assigned to neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths. Restricted
status of neutrosophic classes of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs are presented.
Different types of neutrosophic strengths and cardinalities are used. Further
directions about some types of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs are summar-
ized.
Keywords: Neutrosophic SuperHyperDominating, Neutrosophic SuperHyper-
Resolving, Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph.

AMS Subject Classification: 05C17, 05C22, 05E45
1.10 Background
Dimension and coloring alongside domination in neutrosophic hypergraphs in
Ref. [Ref11] by Henry Garrett (2022), three types of neutrosophic alliances
based on connectedness and (strong) edges in Ref. [Ref13] by Henry Garrett
(2022), properties of SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph in
Ref. [Ref12] by Henry Garrett (2022), are studied. Also, some studies and
researches about neutrosophic graphs, are proposed as a book in Ref. [Ref10]
by Henry Garrett (2022).
1.11 Preliminaries
A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}

+
26
1.11. Preliminaries

condition
−
0 ≤ TA (x) + IA (x) + FA (x) ≤ 3+ .
+
of ]− 0, 1 [.
A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}.
membership degree is defined as the degree of truth-membership, indeterminacy-
membership and falsity-membership of the single valued neutrosophic set
A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}:
T (A) = min[TA (vi ), TA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈A ,
I(A) = min[IA (vi ), IA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈A ,

and F (A) = min[FA (vi ), FA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈A .
Definition 1.11.5 (Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph). (Ref.[4],Definition

3,p.291).
A neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an ordered pair
S = (V, E), where
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vm } a finite set of finite single valued neutrosophic

subsets of V 0 ;
(ii) Vi = {(vi , µj (vi ), λj (vi ), τj (vi )) : µj (vi ), λj (vi ), τj (vi )) ≥ 0} and 0 ≤

µj (vi ) + λj (vi ) + τj (vi )) ≤ 3, (j = 1, 2, . . . , m);
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Em } a finite set of finite single valued neutrosophic

subsets of V ;
(iv) Ei = {(Vi , µ0j (Vi ), λ0j (Vi ), τj0 (Vi )) : µ0j (Vi ), λ0j (Vi ), τj0 (Vi )) ≥ 0} and
0 ≤ µ0j (Vi ) + λ0j (Vi ) + τj0 (Vi )) ≤ 3, (j = 1, 2, . . . , m);
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (j = 1, 2, . . . , m);
(vi) Ei 6= ∅, (j = 1, 2, . . . , m);
P
(vii) j supp(Vi ) = V, (j = 1, 2, . . . , m);
27
Bibliography
P
(viii) j supp(Ei ) = V, (j = 1, 2, . . . , m);
T (Ej ) ≤ min[T (Vi ), T (Vj )]Vi ,Vj ∈Ej ,
I(Ej ) ≤ min[I(Vi ), I(Vj )]Vi ,Vj ∈Ej ,

and F (Ej ) ≤ min[F (Vi ), F (Vj )]Vi ,Vj ∈Ej .
Here the edges Ej and the vertices Vj are single valued neutrosophic sets.
µj (vi ), λj (vi ), and τj (vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the vertex vi to
the vertex Vj . µ0j (vi ), λ0j (vi ), and τj0 (vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership,
the degree of indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership
of the vertex vi to the edge Ej . Thus, the elements of the incidence matrix
of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are of the form (vij , µ0j (vi ), λ0j (vi ), τj0 (vi )),
the sets V and E are crisp sets.
Definition 1.11.6 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph).
(Ref.[4],Section 4,pp.291-292).
S = (V, E). The edges Ei and the vertices Vi of SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei | = 2, then Ei is called
edge;
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei | ≥ 2, then Ei is called
HyperEdge;
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei | = 2, then Ei

(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei | ≥ 2, then Ei

1.12 General Forms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph

diverse types of general forms of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs.
(i) 1 ⊗ x = x;
(ii) x ⊗ y = y ⊗ x;
(iii) x ⊗ (y ⊗ z) = (x ⊗ y) ⊗ z;
28
1.12. General Forms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph
membership and falsity-membership of the single valued neutrosophic set (with
respect to t-norm Tnorm ): A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}:
T (A) = Tnorm [TA (vi ), TA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈A ,
I(A) = Tnorm [IA (vi ), IA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈A ,

and F (A) = Tnorm [FA (vi ), FA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈A .
Definition 1.12.4. (General Forms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph).

A neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an ordered pair S =
(V, E), where
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vm } a finite single valued neutrosophic subset of V 0 ;

µj (vi ) + λj (vi ) + τj (vi )) ≤ 3, (j = 1, 2, . . . , m);
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Em } a finite single valued neutrosophic subset of V 0 ;
(iv) Ei = {(vi , µ0j (vi ), λ0j (vi ), τj0 (vi )) : µ0j (vi ), λ0j (vi ), τj0 (vi )) ≥ 0} and 0 ≤
µ0j (vi ) + λ0j (vi ) + τj0 (vi )) ≤ 3, (j = 1, 2, . . . , m);
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (j = 1, 2, . . . , m);
(vi) Ei 6= ∅, (j = 1, 2, . . . , m);
P
(vii) j supp(Vi ) = V, (j = 1, 2, . . . , m);
P
(viii) j supp(Ei ) = V, (j = 1, 2, . . . , m).
the degree of indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of
the vertex vi to the edge Ej . Thus, the elements of the incidence matrix of t-
norm neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are of the form (vij , µ0j (vi ), λ0j (vi ), τj0 (vi )),
Definition 1.12.5 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph).
(Ref.[4],Section 4,pp.291-292).
S = (V, E). The edges Ei and the vertices Vi of SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)
29
Bibliography

(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei | = 2, then Ei is called
edge;
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei | ≥ 2, then Ei is called
HyperEdge;
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei | = 2, then Ei
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei | ≥ 2, then Ei
1.13 Relations of Single Valued Neutrosophic Graph and

Single Valued Neutrosophic HyperGraph With
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph
Definition 1.13.1 (Single Valued Neutrosophic Graph). (Ref.[2],Definition
3.1,p.89).
A single valued neutrosophic graph (SVN-graph) with underlying set V is
defined to be a pair G = (A, B) where


and FB ({vi , vj }) ≤ min[FA (vi ), FA (vj )]

element of E. Thus, G = (A, B) is a single valued neutrosophic graph of
G∗ = (A, B) if
and FB ({vi , vj }) ≤ min[FA (vi ), FA (vj )] for all (vi , vj ) ∈ E.
30
1.14. Types of SuperHyperEdges
Proposition 1.13.2. Let an ordered pair S = (V, E) be a single valued

neutrosophic graph. Then S = (V, E) is a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph
(NSHG) S.
Definition 1.13.3 (Single Valued Neutrosophic HyperGraph). (Ref.[1],Definition
2.5,p.123).
Let V = {v1 , v2 , . . . , vn } be a finite set and E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Em } be a fi-
nite family
P of non-trivial single valued neutrosophic subsets of V such that
V = i supp(Ei ), i = 1, 2, 3, . . . , m, where the edges Ei are single valued
neutrosophic subsets of V, Ei = {(vj , TEi (vj ), IEi (vj ), FEi (vj ))}, Ei 6= ∅, for
i = 1, 2, 3, . . . , m. Then the pair H = (V, E) is a single valued neutrosophic
HyperGraph on V, E is the family of single-valued neutrosophic HyperEdges
of H and V is the crisp vertex set of H.
Proposition 1.13.4. Let an ordered pair S = (V, E) be single valued neutro-
sophic HyperGraph. Then S = (V, E) is a type of general forms of neutrosophic
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S.
1.14 Types of SuperHyperEdges

Definition 1.14.1. Let an ordered pair S = (V, E) be a neutrosophic
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S. Then a sequence of SuperHyperVertices and
SuperHyperEdges
V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , . . . , Vs−1 , Es−1 , Vs
is called a neutrosophic SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from SuperHyperVertex
V1 to SuperHyperVertex Vs if either of following conditions hold:
(i) Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei ;
(ii) there’s a vertex vi ∈ Vi such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei ;
(iii) there’s a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi such that Vi0 , Vi+1 ∈ Ei ;
(iv) there’s a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei ;
0 0
(v) there’s a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei ;
(vi) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei ;
0
(vii) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that
0
vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei ;
(viii) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that
Vi0 , vi+1 ∈ Ei ;
(ix) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1
0
∈ Vi+1 such that
0 0
Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei .
Definition 1.14.2. (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths).
(V, E). A neutrosophic SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from SuperHyperVertex V1 to
SuperHyperVertex Vs is sequence of SuperHyperVertices and SuperHyperEdges
V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , . . . , Vs−1 , Es−1 , Vs ,
31
Bibliography
could be characterized as follow-up items.
(i) If for all Vi , Ej , |Vi | = 1, |Ej | = 2, then NSHP is called path;
(ii) if for all Ej , |Ej | = 2, and there’s Vi , |Vi | ≥ 1, then NSHP is called
SuperPath;
(iii) if for all Vi , Ej , |Vi | = 1, |Ej | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called HyperPath;
(iv) if there are Vi , Ej , |Vi | ≥ 1, |Ej | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called SuperHyper-

Path.
Definition 1.14.3. (Neutrosophic Strength of the Neutrosophic SuperHyper-

Paths).
S = (V, E). A neutrosophic SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from SuperHyperVertex
V1 to SuperHyperVertex Vs is sequence of SuperHyperVertices and SuperHy-
perEdges
V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , . . . , Vs−1 , Es−1 , Vs ,
have
(i) neutrosophic t-strength (min{T (Vi )}, m, n)si=1 ;
(ii) neutrosophic i-strength (m, min{I(Vi )}, n)si=1 ;
(iii) neutrosophic f-strength (m, n, min{F (Vi )})si=1 ;
(iv) neutrosophic strength (min{T (Vi )}, min{I(Vi )}, min{F (Vi )})si=1 .
Definition 1.14.4. (Different Types of SuperHyperEdges).

S = (V, E). Consider a SuperHyperEdge E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is
called
(i) neutrosophic aT if T (E) = min{T (Vi )}si=1 ;
(ii) neutrosophic aI if I(E) = min{I(Vi )}si=1 ;
(iii) neutrosophic aF if F (E) = min{F (Vi )}si=1 ;
(iv) neutrosophic aTIF if (T (E), I(E), F (E)) = (min{T (Vi )}, min{I(Vi )}, min{F (Vi )})si=1 ;
(v) neutrosophic bT if T (E) = {T (Vi )}si=1 ;

Q
(vi) neutrosophic bI if I(E) = {I(Vi )}si=1 ;

Q
(vii) neutrosophic bF if F (E) = {F (Vi )}si=1 ;

Q
(viii) neutrosophic bTIF if (T (E), I(E), F (E)) = ( {T (Vi )}, {I(Vi )}, {F (Vi )})si=1 ;
Q Q Q
(ix) neutrosophic cT (/ − dT / − eT / − fT / − gT ) if T (E) > (/− ≥ /− =

/− < /− ≤) maximum number of neutrosophic t-strength of SuperHyper-
Path (NSHP) from SuperHyperVertex Vi to SuperHyperVertex Vj where
1 ≤ i, j ≤ s;
32
1.15. Types of Notions Based on Different SuperHyperEdges
(x) neutrosophic cI (/ − dI / − eI / − fI / − gI ) if I(E) > (/− ≥ /− = /− <

/− ≤) maximum number of neutrosophic i-strength of SuperHyperPath
(NSHP) from SuperHyperVertex Vi to SuperHyperVertex Vj where
1 ≤ i, j ≤ s;
(xi) neutrosophic cF (/ − dF / − eF / − fF / − gF ) if F (E) > (/− ≥ /− =

/− < /− ≤) maximum number of neutrosophic f-strength of SuperHyper-
Path (NSHP) from SuperHyperVertex Vi to SuperHyperVertex Vj where
1 ≤ i, j ≤ s;
(xii) neutrosophic cTIF (/ − dTIF / − eTIF / − fTIF / − gTIF ) if (T (E), I(E), F (E)) >
(/− ≥ /− = /− < /− ≤) maximum number of neutrosophic strength of
SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from SuperHyperVertex Vi to SuperHyperVer-
tex Vj where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s.
1.15 Types of Notions Based on Different

SuperHyperEdges
Symmetric Notions
For instance, both SuperHyperDominate, instantly.
S = (V, E). Let D be a set of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices [a Super-
HyperVertex alongside triple pair of its values is called neutrosophic Supe-
rHyperVertex.]. If for every neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex N in V \ D,
there’s at least a neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex Di in D such that N, Di is
in a SuperHyperEdge is neutrosophic aT (−aI / − aF / − aT IF / − bT / − bI / −
SuperHyperVertices S is called neutrosophic
SuperHyperDominating set. The minimum (I-/F-/- -)T-neutrosophic car-
dinality between all neutrosophic aT (−aI / − aF / − aT IF / − bT / − bI / − bF / −
bT IF / − . . . / − gT / − gI / − gF / − gT IF ) SuperHyperDominating sets is called
SuperHyperDominating number and it’s denoted by
X
X
X
X
and |A| = [|A|T , |A|I , |A|F ].
33
Bibliography
Definition 1.15.2. (Neutrosophic k-number SuperHyperDominating).

S = (V, E). Let D be a set of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices [a Su-
perHyperVertex alongside triple pair of its values is called neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertex.]. If for every neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex N in
V \ D, there are at least neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices D1 , D2 , . . . , Dk
in D such that N, Di (i = 1, 2, . . . , k) is in a SuperHyperEdge is neutrosophic
then the set of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices S is called neutrosophic
k-number SuperHyperDominating set. The minimum (I-/F-/- -)T-
k-number SuperHyperDominating number and it’s denoted by
X
X
X
X
and |A| = [|A|T , |A|I , |A|F ].
S = (V, E). Let D be a set of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices [a SuperHy-
perVertex alongside triple pair of its values is called neutrosophic SuperHy-
perVertex.]. If for every neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex Di in D, there’s at
least a neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex N in V \ D, such that N, Di is in
a SuperHyperEdge is neutrosophic aT (−aI / − aF / − aT IF / − bT / − bI / −
dual SuperHyperDominating set. The minimum (I-/F-/- -)T-neutrosophic
dual SuperHyperDominating number and it’s denoted by
X
X
34
X
X
and |A| = [|A|T , |A|I , |A|F ].
S = (V, E). Let D be a set of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices [a Super-
HyperVertex alongside triple pair of its values is called neutrosophic Supe-
rHyperVertex.]. If for every neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex N in V \ D,
there’s only one neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex Di in D such that N, Di is
in a SuperHyperEdge is neutrosophic aT (−aI / − aF / − aT IF / − bT / − bI / −
perfect SuperHyperDominating set. The minimum (I-/F-/- -)T-
perfect SuperHyperDominating number and it’s denoted by
X
X
X
X
and |A| = [|A|T , |A|I , |A|F ].
(V, E). Let D be a set of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices [a SuperHyperVertex
alongside triple pair of its values is called neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex.]. If for
every neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex N in V, there’s at least a neutrosophic Su-
perHyperVertex Di in D such that N, Di is in a SuperHyperEdge is neutrosophic
then the set of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices S is called neutrosophic
total SuperHyperDominating set. The minimum (I-/F-/- -)T-neutrosophic
total SuperHyperDominating number and it’s denoted by
X
35
Bibliography
X
X
X
and |A| = [|A|T , |A|I , |A|F ].
Definition 1.15.6. (Different Types of SuperHyperResolving).
S = (V, E). If d(Ri , N ) 6= d(Ri , N 0 ), then two SuperHyperVertices N and
N 0 are
(i) neutrosophic aT resolved by SuperHyperVertex Ri where d(Vi , Vj ) =
min{T (Vi ), T (Vj )};
(ii) neutrosophic aI resolved by SuperHyperVertex Ri where d(Vi , Vj ) =
min{I(Vi ), I(Vj )};
(iii) neutrosophic aF resolved by SuperHyperVertex Ri where d(Vi , Vj ) =
min{F (Vi ), F (Vj )};
(iv) neutrosophic aTIF resolved by SuperHyperVertex Ri where d(Vi , Vj ) =
(min{T (Vi ), T (Vj )}, min{I(Vi ), I(Vj )}, min{F (Vi ), F (Vj )});
neutrosophic bT resolved by SuperHyperVertex Ri where d(Vi , Vj ) =
(v) Q
{T (Vi ), T (Vj )};
(vi) neutrosophic
Q bI resolved by SuperHyperVertex Ri where d(Vi , Vj ) =
{I(Vi ), I(Vj )};
(vii) neutrosophic
Q bF resolved by SuperHyperVertex Ri where d(Vi , Vj ) =
{F (Vi ), F (Vj )};
(viii) neutrosophic
Q Q resolved by SuperHyperVertex
aTIF Q Ri where d(Vi , Vj ) =
( {T (Vi ), T (Vj )}, {I(Vi ), I(Vj )}, {F (Vi ), F (Vj )});
(ix) neutrosophic cT resolved by SuperHyperVertex Ri where d(Vi , Vj ) is
the maximum number of neutrosophic t-strength of SuperHyperPath
(NSHP) from SuperHyperVertex Vi to SuperHyperVertex Vj ;
(x) neutrosophic cI resolved by SuperHyperVertex Ri where d(Vi , Vj ) is
the maximum number of neutrosophic i-strength of SuperHyperPath
(xi) neutrosophic cF resolved by SuperHyperVertex Ri where d(Vi , Vj ) is
the maximum number of neutrosophic f-strength of SuperHyperPath
(xii) neutrosophic cTIF resolved by SuperHyperVertex Ri where d(Vi , Vj )
is the maximum number of neutrosophic strength of SuperHyperPath
(xiii) neutrosophic dT resolved by SuperHyperVertex Ri where d(Vi , Vj )
is the maximum number of degree of truth-membership of all Super-
HyperVertices in SuperHyperPath (NSHP) with maximum number of
neutrosophic t-strength from SuperHyperVertex Vi to SuperHyperVertex
Vj ;
36
(xiv) neutrosophic dI resolved by SuperHyperVertex Ri where d(Vi , Vj )

is the maximum number of degree of indeterminacy-membership of all
SuperHyperVertices in SuperHyperPath (NSHP) with maximum number
of neutrosophic i-strength from SuperHyperVertex Vi to SuperHyperVertex
Vj ;
(xv) neutrosophic dF resolved by SuperHyperVertex Ri where d(Vi , Vj )

is the maximum number of degree of falsity-membership of all Super-
HyperVertices in SuperHyperPath (NSHP) with maximum number of
neutrosophic f-strength from SuperHyperVertex Vi to SuperHyperVertex
Vj ;
(xvi) neutrosophic dTIF resolved by SuperHyperVertex Ri where d(Vi , Vj )

is the maximum number of the triple (degree of truth-membership,
degree of indeterminacy-membership, degree of falsity-membership) of all
SuperHyperVertices in SuperHyperPath (NSHP) with maximum number
of neutrosophic f-strength from SuperHyperVertex Vi to SuperHyperVertex
Vj ;
(xvii) neutrosophic eT resolved by SuperHyperVertex Ri where d(Vi , Vj ) is

the maximum number of SuperHyperEdges in SuperHyperPath (NSHP)
with maximum number of neutrosophic t-strength from SuperHyperVertex
Vi to SuperHyperVertex Vj ;
(xviii) neutrosophic eI resolved by SuperHyperVertex Ri where d(Vi , Vj ) is

with maximum number of neutrosophic i-strength from SuperHyperVertex
(xix) neutrosophic eF resolved by SuperHyperVertex Ri where d(Vi , Vj ) is

with maximum number of neutrosophic f-strength from SuperHyperVertex
(xx) neutrosophic eTIF resolved by SuperHyperVertex Ri where d(Vi , Vj )

is the maximum number of SuperHyperEdges in SuperHyperPath (NSHP)
with maximum number of neutrosophic t-strength, neutrosophic i-
strength and neutrosophic f-strength from SuperHyperVertex Vi to
SuperHyperVertex Vj .

(V, E). Let R be a set of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices [a SuperHyperVertex
alongside triple pair of its values is called neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex.]. If
for every neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices N and N 0 in V \ R, there’s at least a
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex Ri in R such that N and N 0 are neutrosophic
aT (−aI /−aF /−aT IF /−bT /−bI /−bF /−bT IF /−. . . /−eT /−eI /−eF /−eT IF )
resolved by Ri , then the set of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices S is called
neutrosophic
aT (−aI / − aF / − aTIF / − bT / − bI / − bF / − bTIF / − . . . / − eT / − eI / − eF / − eTIF )
SuperHyperResolving set. The minimum (I-/F-/- -)T-neutrosophic cardin-
ality between all neutrosophic aT (−aI / − aF / − aT IF / − bT / − bI / − bF / −
37
Bibliography
bT IF / − . . . / − eT / − eI / − eF / − eT IF ) SuperHyperResolving sets is called

RaT (−aI /−aF /−aT IF /−bT /−bI /−bF /−bT IF /−.../−eT /−eI /−eF /−eT IF ) (N SHG)
X
X
X
X
and |A| = [|A|T , |A|I , |A|F ].
Definition 1.15.8. (Neutrosophic k-number SuperHyperResolving).
S = (V, E). Let R be a set of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices [a SuperHyper-
Vertex alongside triple pair of its values is called neutrosophic SuperHyperVer-
tex.]. If for every neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices N and N 0 in V \ R, there
are at least neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices R1 , R2 , . . . , Rk in R such that N
and N 0 are neutrosophic aT (−aI / − aF / − aT IF / − bT / − bI / − bF / − bT IF / −
. . . / − eT / − eI / − eF / − eT IF ) resolved by Ri (i = 1, 2, . . . , k), then the set of
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices S is called neutrosophic
k-number SuperHyperResolving set. The minimum (I-/F-/- -)T-
bT / − bI / − bF / − bT IF / − . . . / − eT / − eI / − eF / − eT IF ) SuperHyperResolving
k-number SuperHyperResolving number and it’s denoted by
X
X
X
X
and |A| = [|A|T , |A|I , |A|F ].
for every neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices Ri and Rj in R, there’s at least a
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex N in V \R such that Ri and Rj are neutrosophic
38

neutrosophic
dual SuperHyperResolving set. The minimum (I-/F-/- -)T-neutrosophic
bF / − bT IF / − . . . / − eT / − eI / − eF / − eT IF ) SuperHyperResolving sets is
dual SuperHyperResolving number and it’s denoted by
X
X
X
X
and |A| = [|A|T , |A|I , |A|F ].

for every neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices N and N 0 in V \ R, there’s only one
neutrosophic
perfect SuperHyperResolving set. The minimum (I-/F-/- -)T-neutrosophic
perfect SuperHyperResolving number and it’s denoted by
X
X
X
X
and |A| = [|A|T , |A|I , |A|F ].
39
Bibliography

for every neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices N and N 0 in V, there’s at least a
neutrosophic
total SuperHyperResolving set. The minimum (I-/F-/- -)T-neutrosophic
X
X
X
X
and |A| = [|A|T , |A|I , |A|F ].

(V, E). Let Z be a set of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices [a SuperHyperVertex
alongside triple pair of its values is called neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex.].
Then Z is called
(i) stable if for every two SuperHyperVertices in Z, there’s no SuperHyper-

Paths amid them;
(ii) connected if for every two SuperHyperVertices in Z, there’s at least one

SuperHyperPath amid them.
Thus Z is called


40
1.16. Classes of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs

Thus Z is called
set.
(i) -/stable/connected) (-/dual/total) perfect (SuperHyperResolv-
-/stable/connected) (-/dual/total) perfect (SuperHyperResolving/Super-
HyperDominating) set.
Antisymmetric Notions
For instance, SuperHyperVertex with bigger values SuperHyperDominates,
instantly.
1.16 Classes of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs

Restricted Status of Classes of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs
Assume neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei such that there’s a Vi is
incident in Ei such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei | = 2. Consider µ = (µ1 , µ2 , µ3 ), µ0 =
(µ01 , µ02 , µ03 ).
Definition 1.16.1. Assume a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an
ordered pair S = (V, E) and O(N SHG) = |V |. Then
(i) : a sequence of consecutive neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices (NSHV)
(N SHP ) : {x0 }, {x1 }, · · · , {xO(N SHG) } is called neutrosophic Supe-
rHyperPath (NSHP) where
{{xi , }{xi+1 }} ∈ E, i = 0, 1, · · · , O(N SHG) − 1;
(ii) : neutrosophic SuperHyperStrength (NSHH) of neutrosophic Su-

perHyperPath (NSHP) N SHP : {x0 }, {x1 }, · · · , {xO(N SHG) } is
0
V
i=0,··· ,O(N SHG)−1 µ ({{xi }, {xi+1 }});
(iii) : neutrosophic SuperHyperConnectedness (NSHN) amid neutro-

sophic SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) x0 and xt is
_ ^
N SHN = µ∞ (x0 , xt ) = µ0 ({{xi }, {xi+1 }});
P :{x0 },{x1 },··· ,{xO(N SHG) } i=0,··· ,t−1
41
Bibliography
(iv) : a sequence of consecutive neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices (NSHV)

N SHP : {x0 }, {x1 }, · · · , {xO(N SHG) }, {x0 } is called neutrosophic
SuperHyperCycle (NSHC) where
{{xi }, {xi+1 }} ∈ E, i = 0, 1, · · · , O(N T G) − 1, {{xO(N T G) }, {x0 }} ∈ E
and there are two neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) {{x}, {y}} and
{{u}, {v}} such that
^
µ0 ({{x}, {y}}) = µ0 ({{u}, {v}}) = µ0 ({{vi }, {vi+1 }});
i=0,1,··· ,n−1
(v) : it’s neutrosophic SuperHyper-t-partite (NSHT) where V is parti-

tioned to t parts, V1s1 , V2s2 , · · · , Vtst and the neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge
s
(NSHE) {{x}, {y}} implies {x} ∈ Visi and {y} ∈ Vj j where i 6= j. If
it’s neutrosophic SuperHyperComplete (NSHM), then it’s denoted by
Kσ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt where σi is σ on Visi instead V which mean {x} 6∈ Vi induces
µi ({x}) = 0. Also, |Vjsi | = si ;
(vi) : neutrosophic SuperHyper-t-partite is neutrosophic SuperHyperBi-
partite (NSHB) if t = 2, and it’s denoted by Kσ1 ,σ2 if it’s neutrosophic
SuperHyperComplete (NSHM);
(vii) : neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite is neutrosophic SuperHyperStar
(NSHS) if |V1 | = 1, and it’s denoted by S1,σ2 ;
(viii) : a neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) in V is neutrosophic Supe-
rHyperCenter (NSHR) if the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV)
joins to all neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) of a neutrosophic Su-
perHyperCycle (NSHC). Then it’s neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel
(NSHW) and it’s denoted by W1,σ2 ;
(ix) : it’s neutrosophic SuperHyperComplete (NSHM) where
∀{u}, {v} ∈ V, µ0 ({{u}, {v}}) = µ({u}) ∧ µ({v});
(x) : it’s neutrosophic SuperHyperStrong (NSHO) where
∀{{u}, {v}} ∈ E, µ0 ({{u}, {v}}) = µ({u}) ∧ µ({v}).
1.17 Further Directions

First Direction
(i) 1 ⊗ x = x;
(ii) x ⊗ y = y ⊗ x;
(iii) x ⊗ (y ⊗ z) = (x ⊗ y) ⊗ z;
42
Definition 1.17.2. (t-norm Single Valued Neutrosophic Graph).

A t-norm single valued neutrosophic graph (tSVN-graph) with underlying
set V is defined to be a pair G = (A, B) where


and FB ({vi , vj }) ≤ Tnorm [FA (vi ), FA (vj )]

element of E. Thus, G = (A, B) is a t-norm single valued neutrosophic graph
of G∗ = (A, B) if

and FB ({vi , vj }) ≤ Tnorm [FA (vi ), FA (vj )] for all (vi , vj ) ∈ E.
membership and falsity-membership of the single valued neutrosophic set (with
respect to t-norm Tnorm ): A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}:
T (A) = Tnorm [TA (vi ), TA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈A ,
I(A) = Tnorm [IA (vi ), IA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈A ,

and F (A) = Tnorm [FA (vi ), FA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈A .
43
Bibliography
Definition 1.17.5. (t-norm Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph).

A t-norm neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (tNSHG) S is an ordered pair
S = (V, E), where
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vm } a finite single valued neutrosophic subset of V 0 ;
µj (vi ) + λj (vi ) + τj (vi )) ≤ 3, (j = 1, 2, . . . , m);
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Em } a finite single valued neutrosophic subset of V 0 ;
(iv) Ei = {(vi , µ0j (vi ), λ0j (vi ), τj0 (vi )) : µ0j (vi ), λ0j (vi ), τj0 (vi )) ≥ 0} and 0 ≤
µ0j (vi ) + λ0j (vi ) + τj0 (vi )) ≤ 3, (j = 1, 2, . . . , m);
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (j = 1, 2, . . . , m);
(vi) Ei 6= ∅, (j = 1, 2, . . . , m);
P
(vii) j supp(Vi ) = V, (j = 1, 2, . . . , m);
P
(viii) j supp(Ei ) = V, (j = 1, 2, . . . , m);
T (Ej ) ≤ Tnorm [T (Vi ), T (Vj )]Vi ,Vj ∈Ej ,
I(Ej ) ≤ Tnorm [I(Vi ), I(Vj )]Vi ,Vj ∈Ej ,

and F (Ej ) ≤ Tnorm [F (Vi ), F (Vj )]Vi ,Vj ∈Ej .
the degree of indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of
the vertex vi to the edge Ej . Thus, the elements of the incidence matrix of t-
norm neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are of the form (vij , µ0j (vi ), λ0j (vi ), τj0 (vi )),
Second Direction
Definition 1.17.6. (x Single Valued Neutrosophic Graph).
A x single valued neutrosophic graph (xSVN-graph) with underlying set

44

and FB ({vi , vj }) ≤ max[FA (vi ), FA (vj )]

element of E. Thus, G = (A, B) is a x single valued neutrosophic graph of
G∗ = (A, B) if
and FB ({vi , vj }) ≤ max[FA (vi ), FA (vj )] for all (vi , vj ) ∈ E.
membership and falsity-membership of the single valued neutrosophic set:
A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}:
T (A) = max[TA (vi ), TA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈A ,
I(A) = max[IA (vi ), IA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈A ,

and F (A) = max[FA (vi ), FA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈A .
Definition 1.17.9. (x Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph).

A x neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (xNSHG) S is an ordered pair
S = (V, E), where

subsets of V 0 ;

µj (vi ) + λj (vi ) + τj (vi )) ≤ 3, (j = 1, 2, . . . , m);

subsets of V ;
0 ≤ µ0j (Vi ) + λ0j (Vi ) + τj0 (Vi )) ≤ 3, (j = 1, 2, . . . , m);
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (j = 1, 2, . . . , m);
(vi) Ei 6= ∅, (j = 1, 2, . . . , m);
45
Bibliography
P
(vii) j supp(Vi ) = V, (j = 1, 2, . . . , m);
P
(viii) j supp(Ei ) = V, (j = 1, 2, . . . , m);
T (Ej ) ≤ max[T (Vi ), T (Vj )]Vi ,Vj ∈Ej ,
I(Ej ) ≤ max[I(Vi ), I(Vj )]Vi ,Vj ∈Ej ,
and F (Ej ) ≤ max[F (Vi ), F (Vj )]Vi ,Vj ∈Ej .
of x neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are of the form (vij , µ0j (vi ), λ0j (vi ), τj0 (vi )),
Third Direction
Definition 1.17.10. (p Single Valued Neutrosophic Graph).
A p single valued neutrosophic graph (pSVN-graph) with underlying set

TB ({vi , vj }) ≤ TA (vi ) × TA (vj ),
IB ({vi , vj }) ≤ IA (vi ) × IA (vj ),
and FB ({vi , vj }) ≤ FA (vi ) × FA (vj )

element of E. Thus, G = (A, B) is a p single valued neutrosophic graph of
G∗ = (A, B) if
TB ({vi , vj }) ≤ TA (vi ) × TA (vj ),
IB ({vi , vj }) ≤ IA (vi ) × IA (vj ),
and FB ({vi , vj }) ≤ FA (vi ) × FA (vj ) for all (vi , vj ) ∈ E.
46
membership and falsity-membership of the single valued neutrosophic set:
A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}:
T (A) = [TA (vi ) × TA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈A ,
I(A) = [IA (vi ) × IA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈A ,

and F (A) = [FA (vi ) × FA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈A .
Definition 1.17.13. (p Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph).

A p neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (pNSHG) S is an ordered pair
S = (V, E), where
subsets of V 0 ;
µj (vi ) + λj (vi ) + τj (vi )) ≤ 3, (j = 1, 2, . . . , m);
subsets of V ;
0 ≤ µ0j (Vi ) + λ0j (Vi ) + τj0 (Vi )) ≤ 3, (j = 1, 2, . . . , m);
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (j = 1, 2, . . . , m);
(vi) Ei 6= ∅, (j = 1, 2, . . . , m);
P
(vii) j supp(Vi ) = V, (j = 1, 2, . . . , m);
P
(viii) j supp(Ei ) = V, (j = 1, 2, . . . , m);
T (Ej ) ≤ [T (Vi ) × T (Vj )]Vi ,Vj ∈Ej ,
I(Ej ) ≤ [I(Vi ) × I(Vj )]Vi ,Vj ∈Ej ,

and F (Ej ) ≤ [F (Vi ) × F (Vj )]Vi ,Vj ∈Ej .
of p neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are of the form (vij , µ0j (vi ), λ0j (vi ), τj0 (vi )),
47
Bibliography

App. Eng. Math. 8 (1) (2018) 122-135.
Theory 10 (2016) 86-101.
Ref11 [4] Henry Garrett, “Dimension and Coloring alongside Domination in Neut-
rosophic Hypergraphs”, Preprints 2021, 2021120448 (doi: 10.20944/pre-
prints202112.0448.v1).
tems 49 (2022) 531-561 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.6456413).
Ref13 [6] Henry Garrett, “Three Types of Neutrosophic Alliances based on Con-
nectedness and (Strong) Edges”, Preprints 2022, 2022010239 (doi:
10.20944/preprints202201.0239.v1).
Press, 2006.
33 (2020) 290-296. (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.3783103).
49
CHAPTER 2
Modified Notions
The following sections are cited as follows, which is my 94th manuscript and I
use prefix 94 as number before any labelling for items.
[Ref?] Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating and SuperHyperResolving

on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in Game Theory and
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: ??????).
SuperHyperDominating and SuperHyperResolving on

Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in Game
Theory and Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses
2.1 Abstract
In this research article, the notions of SuperHyperDominating and SuperHy-
perResolving are defined in the setting of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs.
Some ideas are introduced on both notions of SuperHyperDominating and
SuperHyperResolving, simultaneously and as the same with each other. Some
neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses are defined based on the notion, SuperHyper-
Resolving. The terms of duality, totality, perfectness, connectedness, and stable,
are added to basic framework and initial notions, SuperHyperDominating and
SuperHyperResolving but the concentration is on the “perfectness” to figure
out what’s going on when for all targeted SuperHyperVertices, there’s only one
SuperHyperVertex in the intended set. There are some instances and some
clarifications to make sense about what’s happened and what’s done in the
starting definitions. The key point is about the minimum sets. There are
some questions and some problems to be taken as some avenues to pursue this
study and this research. A basic familiarity with SuperHyperGraph theory and
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph theory are proposed.
Keywords: SuperHyperDominating, SuperHyperResolving, SuperHyper-
Graphs, Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs, Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses

AMS Subject Classification: 05C17, 05C22, 05E45
2.2 Background
There are some studies covering the topic of this research. In what follows,
there are some discussion and literature reviews about them.
51
2. Modified Notions
First article is titled “properties of SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic

SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [Ref11] by Henry Garrett (2022). It’s first step
toward the study on neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs. This research article
is published on the journal “Neutrosophic Sets and Systems” in issue 49 and
the pages 531-561. In this research article, different types of notions like
dominating, resolving, coloring, Eulerian(Hamiltonian) neutrosophic path, n-
Eulerian(Hamiltonian) neutrosophic path, zero forcing number, zero forcing
neutrosophic- number, independent number, independent neutrosophic-number,
clique number, clique neutrosophic-number, matching number, matching
neutrosophic-number, girth, neutrosophic girth, 1-zero-forcing number, 1-
zero- forcing neutrosophic-number, failed 1-zero-forcing number, failed 1-zero-
forcing neutrosophic-number, global- offensive alliance, t-offensive alliance,
t-defensive alliance, t-powerful alliance, and global-powerful alliance are defined
in SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Some Classes of
SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are cases of study.
Some results are applied in family of SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic
SuperHyperGraph. Thus this research article has concentrated on the vast
notions and introducing the majority of notions.
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “neutrosophic co-
degree and neutrosophic degree alongside chromatic numbers in the setting of
some classes related to neutrosophic hypergraphs” in Ref. [Ref8] by Henry
Garrett (2022). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on
SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on general forms
without using neutrosophic classes of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s
published in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled “Journal of Current Trends
in Computer Science Research (JCTCSR)” with abbreviation “J Curr Trends
Comp Sci Res” in volume 1 and issue 1 with pages 06-14. The research article
studies deeply with choosing neutrosophic hypergraphs instead of neutrosophic
SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent results based on
initial background.
In two articles are titled “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study
Some Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE)
in Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)” in Ref. [Ref82] by Henry Garrett
(2022) and “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning SuperHyperDominating
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [Ref81]
by Henry Garrett (2022) , there are some efforts to formalize the basic notions
about neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph.
Some studies and researches about neutrosophic graphs, are proposed as book
in Ref. [Ref9] by Henry Garrett (2022) which is indexed by Google Scholar
and has more than 1850 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Beyond Neutrosophic
Graphs” and published by Ohio: E-publishing: Educational Publisher 1091
West 1st Ave Grandview Heights, Ohio 43212 United State. This research book
covers different types of notions and settings in neutrosophic graph theory and
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph theory.
Also, some studies and researches about neutrosophic graphs, are proposed as
book in Ref. [Ref10] by Henry Garrett (2022) which is indexed by Google
Scholar and has more than 2534 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Neutrosophic
Duality” and published by Florida: GLOBAL KNOWLEDGE - Publishing
House 848 Brickell Ave Ste 950 Miami, Florida 33131 United States. This
research book presents different types of notions SuperHyperResolving and
52
2.2. Background
SuperHyperDominating in the setting of duality in neutrosophic graph theory

and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph theory. This research book has scrutiny
on the complement of the intended set and the intended set, simultaneously.
It’s smart to consider a set but acting on its complement that what’s done in
this research book which is popular in the terms of high readers in Scribd.
Motivation and Contributions

In this study, there’s an idea which could be considered as a motivation.
Question 2.2.1. How to define a set of SuperHyperVertices such that its
SuperHyperVertices either “connect” to all other SuperHyperVertices or
“separate” all other couple of SuperHyperVertices?
It’s motivation to find notions to use in this dense model is titled
“neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”. The new notions, SuperHyperResolving and
SuperHyperDominating, are applied in this setting. Different versions of these
notions are introduced and studied like perfect, dual, connected, stable and total.
How to figure out these notions leads us to get more results and to introduce
neutrosophic classes of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs. The connections amid
SuperHyperVertices motivates us to find minimum set such that this set only
contains SuperHyperVertices and it has some elements connecting to other
elements outside of this set. Another motivation is the key term “separation”.
Separating SuperHyperVertices from each other to distinguish amid them. It
leads us to new measurement acting on the number of connections between
SuperHyperVertices. Thus these ideas are the motivations to start this study.
Minimum set concludes the discussion in every directions. 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 the subsection “Preliminaries”,
new notions of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs, perfect, dual, connected,
stable, total, SuperHyperResolving, and SuperHyperDominating are defined
for introduced results and used classes. In the section “The Setting of
The Neutrosophic SuperHyperDominating”, new notions are clarified and
there are more instances to make more senses about the new ideas. In
the section “The Setting of Maximum Number of The Neutrosophic Stable
Perfect”, the notion of stable is applied on the notion, perfect. The maximum
number is the matter of minds and there are sufficient clarifications. In
the section “The Setting of Maximum Number of The Neutrosophic Dual
Perfect”, the notion of dual is applied on the notion, perfect. The maximum
number is intended and there are many examples and illustrations. There
are other sections like “The Setting of Minimum Number of The Neutrosophic
Notions”, “The Setting of Minimum Number of The Neutrosophic Total Perfect”,
“The Setting of Minimum Number of The Neutrosophic ConnectedPerfect”,
“The Setting of The Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving”,“Some Results on
Neutrosophic Classes Via Minimum SuperHyperDominatingSet”, “Minimum
SuperHyperDominating Set and Minimum Perfect SuperHyperDominatingSet”,
“Applications in GameTheory”, “Open Problems”, “Conclusion and Closing
Remarks”. In the section “Applications in Game Theory”, two applications
are posed. In the section “Open Problems”, some problems and questions for
further studies are proposed. In the section “Conclusion and Closing Remarks”,
53
2. Modified Notions
gentle discussion about results and applications is featured. In the section

“Conclusion and Closing Remarks”, a brief overview concerning advantages and
limitations of this study alongside conclusions is formed.
Preliminaries
In this subsection, basic material which is used in this article, is presented.
Also, new ideas and their clarifications are elicited.
A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}

+
condition
−
0 ≤ TA (x) + IA (x) + FA (x) ≤ 3+ .
+
of ]− 0, 1 [.
A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}.

TA (X) = min[TA (vi ), TA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈X ,
IA (X) = min[IA (vi ), IA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈X ,

and FA (X) = min[FA (vi ), FA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈X .
A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}:
Definition 2.2.6 (Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). (Ref.[4],Definition

3,p.291).
of V 0 ;
54
2.2. Background

1, 2, . . . , n);

subsets of V ;
0}, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 );
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n);
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 );

P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n);
0 0
P
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n );
0
TV0 (Ei0 ) ≤ min[TV 0 (Vi ), TV 0 (Vj )]Vi ,Vj ∈Ei0 ,
IV0 (Ei0 ) ≤ min[IV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vj )]Vi ,Vj ∈Ei0 ,

and FV0 (Ei0 ) ≤ min[FV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vj )]Vi ,Vj ∈Ei0
where i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 .

edge;
HyperEdge;
55
2. Modified Notions
diverse types of general forms of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG).
(i) 1 ⊗ x = x;
(ii) x ⊗ y = y ⊗ x;
(iii) x ⊗ (y ⊗ z) = (x ⊗ y) ⊗ z;

Definition 2.2.10. The support of X ⊂ A of the single valued neutrosophic
Definition 2.2.11. (General Forms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph

(NSHG)).
of V 0 ;
1, 2, . . . , n);
subsets of V ;
0}, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 );
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n);
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 );
56
2.2. Background
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n);
supp(Ei0 ) = V, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ).
P
(viii) i0

edge;
HyperEdge;
N in V \ D, there’s at least a neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Di in
D such that N, Di is in a neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) is neutro-
sophic then the set of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) S is called
neutrosophic SuperHyperDominating set. The minimum neutrosophic
cardinality between all neutrosophic SuperHyperDominating sets is called neut-
rosophic SuperHyperDominating number and it’s denoted by
D(N SHG) where (neutrosophic cardinality of the single valued neutro-
sophic set A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}:
X
57
2. Modified Notions
X
X
X
and |A| = [|A|T , |A|I , |A|F ].

(NSHV) Di in D, there’s at least a neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV)
N in V \ D, such that N, Di is in a neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE)
is neutrosophic then the set of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) S
is called neutrosophic dual SuperHyperDominating set. The minimum
neutrosophic cardinality between all neutrosophic SuperHyperDominating sets
is called neutrosophic dual SuperHyperDominating number and it’s
denoted by D(N SHG) where neutrosophic cardinality of the single valued
neutrosophic set A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}:
X
X
X
X
and |A| = [|A|T , |A|I , |A|F ].

(NSHV) N in V \ D, there’s only one neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV)
Di in D such that N, Di is in a neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) is
neutrosophic then the set of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) S is
called neutrosophic perfect SuperHyperDominating set. The minimum
is called neutrosophic perfect SuperHyperDominating number and it’s
X
X
X
X
and |A| = [|A|T , |A|I , |A|F ].
58
2.2. Background

(NSHV) N in V, there’s at least a neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV)
Di in D such that N, Di is in a neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) is
neutrosophic then the set of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) S is
called neutrosophictotal SuperHyperDominating set. The minimum
is called neutrosophictotal SuperHyperDominating number and it’s
X
X
X
X
and |A| = [|A|T , |A|I , |A|F ].
(NSHV) N and N 0 in V \ R, there’s at least a neutrosophic SuperHyperVer-
tex (NSHV) Ri in R such that N and N 0 are neutrosophic resolved by Ri ,
sophicSuperHyperResolving set. The minimum neutrosophic cardinality
between all neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving sets is called neutrosophic Su-
perHyperResolving number and it’s denoted by
R(N SHG) where neutrosophic cardinality of the single valued neutrosophic
X
X
X
X
and |A| = [|A|T , |A|I , |A|F ].
(NSHV) Ri and Rj in R, there’s at least a neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex
(NSHV) N in V \ R such that Ri and Rj are neutrosophic resolved by Ri , then
59
2. Modified Notions
the set of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) S is called neutrosophic

dual SuperHyperResolving set. The minimum neutrosophic cardinality
between all neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving sets is called neutrosophicdual
X
X
X
X
and |A| = [|A|T , |A|I , |A|F ].
(NSHV) N and N 0 in V \ R, there’s only one neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex
(NSHV) Ri in R such that N and N 0 are neutrosophic resolved by Ri , then
perfect SuperHyperResolving set. The minimum neutrosophic cardinality
between all neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving sets is called neutrosophic
perfect SuperHyperResolving number and it’s denoted by R(N SHG)
where neutrosophic cardinality of the single valued neutrosophic set A =
{< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}:
X
X
X
X
and |A| = [|A|T , |A|I , |A|F ].
(NSHV) N and N 0 in V, there’s at least a neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex
(NSHV) Ri in R such that N and N 0 are neutrosophic resolved by Ri , then
total SuperHyperResolving set. The minimum neutrosophic cardinality
between all neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving sets is called neutrosophic
X
60
2.2. Background
X
X
X
and |A| = [|A|T , |A|I , |A|F ].

S = (V, E). Let Z be a set of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) [a
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV).]. Then Z is called
(i) stable if for every two neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) in Z,

there’s no SuperHyperPaths amid them;
(ii) connected if for every two neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) in

Z, there’s at least one SuperHyperPath amid them.
Thus Z is called




Thus Z is called

set.

Resolving/SuperHyperDominating) number if its corresponded
set Z is -/stable/connected) (-/dual/total) perfect (SuperHyperResolv-
ing/SuperHyperDominating) set.
61
2. Modified Notions
Table 2.1: The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and

SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph Mentioned
in the Example (2.3.1)
The Values of The Vertices The Number of Position in Alphabet

The Values of The SuperVertices The Minimum Values of Its Vertices
The Values of The Edges The Minimum Values of Its Vertices
The Values of The HyperEdges The Minimum Values of Its Vertices
The Values of The SuperHyperEdges The Minimum Values of Its Endpoints
94TBL1
2.3 The Setting of The Neutrosophic

SuperHyperDominating
The Definitions of the terms in this section are referred by the previous chapter.
94EXM1 Example 2.3.1. In Figure (2.1), the SuperHyperGraph is highlighted and fea-
tured. The sets, {A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O}, {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 }, {E3 }, {E1 },
and {E2 , E4 } are the sets of vertices, SuperVertices, edges, HyperEdges, and
SuperHyperEdges, respectively. The SuperVertices V1 , V2 and V4 SuperHyper-
Dominate each other by the SuperHyperEdge E4 . The SuperVertex V3 doesn’t
SuperHyperDominate. The vertices G and J dominate each other by the
edge E3 . The vertices A, B, C, D, E, F, G, I, J, K, L, M, and N HyperDominate
each other by the SuperHyperEdge E4 . The vertices H and O HyperDomin-
ate each other by the HyperEdge E1 . The set of vertices and SuperVertices,
{A, H, V1 , V3 } is minimal SuperHyperDominating set. The minimum SuperHy-
perDominating number is 17. The sets of vertices and SuperVertices, which are
listed below, are the minimal SuperHyperDominating sets corresponded to the
minimum SuperHyperDominating number which is 17.
{A, H, V1 , V3 }, {M, H, V1 , V3 }, {B, H, V1 , V3 }, {C, H, V1 , V3 }, {L, H, V1 , V3 },

{D, H, V1 , V3 }, {E, H, V1 , V3 }, {N, H, V1 , V3 }, {A, H, V2 , V3 }, {M, H, V2 , V3 },
{B, H, V2 , V3 }, {C, H, V2 , V3 }, {L, H, V2 , V3 }, {D, H, V2 , V3 }, {E, H, V2 , V3 },
{N, H, V2 , V3 }, {A, O, V1 , V3 }, {M, O, V1 , V3 }, {B, O, V1 , V3 }, {C, O, V1 , V3 },
{L, O, V1 , V3 }, {D, O, V1 , V3 }, {E, O, V1 , V3 }, {N, O, V1 , V3 }, {A, O, V2 , V3 },
{M, O, V2 , V3 }, {B, O, V2 , V3 }, {C, O, V2 , V3 }, {L, O, V2 , V3 }, {D, O, V2 , V3 },
{E, O, V2 , V3 }, {N, O, V2 , V3 }.
By using the Figure (2.3.1) and the Table (2.1), the neutrosophic SuperHyper-
Graph is obtained.
There are some points for the vertex A as follows.
(i) : The vertex A SuperHyperDominates M, I and G by using three

SuperHyperEdges E1 , E2 , and E4 .
(ii) : The vertex A SuperHyperDominates B, J, K, L, and F by using two

SuperHyperEdges E2 , and E4 .
62
2.3. The Setting of The Neutrosophic SuperHyperDominating
Figure 2.1: A Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph Associated to the Notions of

SuperHyperDominating in the Example (2.3.1) 94NHG1
(iii) : The vertex A SuperHyperDominates C, D, E, H, and N by using one

SuperHyperEdge E4 .
There are some points for the vertex H as follows.
(i) : The vertex H SuperHyperDominates A, M, G, and O by using one

SuperHyperEdge E1 .
There are some points for the SuperVertex V1 as follows.
(i) : The SuperVertex V1 SuperHyperDominates V2 , and V4 by using one

SuperHyperEdge E4 .
(i) : The SuperVertex V3 SuperHyperDominates no SuperVertex. It’s an

isolated SuperVertex.
In this case, there’s no SuperHyperMatching.

With the exception of the isolated SuperVertex and the isolated vertex, the
neutrosophic notion of perfect has no set here. In the upcoming section, a kind
of a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph will be featured. This kind is based on one
kind of neutrosophic notions, perfect, total, global, connected, stable, k-number,
dual, and the combinations of them.
tured. The sets, {A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O}, {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 }, {E3 }, {E1 , E2 },
and {E4 } are the sets of vertices, SuperVertices, edges, HyperEdges, and Supe-
rHyperEdges, respectively. By using the Figure (2.3.2) and the Table (2.2), the
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph is obtained.
63
2. Modified Notions



94TBL2
(i) : The vertex A SuperHyperDominates B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, M, N

and O by using one SuperHyperEdge E4 .

SuperHyperEdge E4 .

To sum them up, the set of SuperVertices and vertices {A, V1 , V3 } is perfect
SuperHyperDominating set. It’s neither of connected, dual, total and stable
SuperHyperDominating set. In this case, there’s no SuperHyperMatching.
64
2.3. The Setting of The Neutrosophic SuperHyperDominating



94TBL3
Proposition 2.3.3. Consider a SuperHyperGraph. If a SuperHyperDominating

set has either an isolated SuperVertex or an isolated vertex, then the set isn’t
connected, dual, and total.
Proposition 2.3.4. Consider a SuperHyperGraph. If a SuperHyperDominating
set has either an isolated SuperVertex or an isolated vertex but neither all
SuperVertices nor all vertices, then the set isn’t connected, dual, total and
stable.
The Example (2.3.2), presents the obvious case in that, the set is perfect
but neither of connected, dual, total and stable. The relation between the
notion perfect and other notions, namely, connected, dual, total and stable are
illustrated as follows.
tured. The sets, {A, B, C, D, E, F, H, I, K, L, M, N, O}, {V1 , V2 , V3 }, {E2 }, {E3 }, {E1 },
and {E4 } are the sets of vertices, SuperVertices, loops, edges, HyperEdges,
and SuperHyperEdges, respectively. By using the Figure (2.3.5) and the Table
(2.3), the neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph is obtained.
65
2. Modified Notions



94TBL4
(i) : The vertex A SuperHyperDominates B, C, D, E, F, H, I, K, L, M, N and

O by using one SuperHyperEdge E4 .

SuperHyperEdge E4 .
To sum them up, the set of SuperVertices and vertices {A, V1 } is perfect
SuperHyperDominating set. It’s either of connected, dual, and total
SuperHyperDominating set but not stable SuperHyperDominating set. In
this case, there’s only one obvious SuperHyperMatching, namely, {E4 }.
tured. The sets, {A, B, C, D, E, F, H, I, K, L, M, N, O}, {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 }, {E3 }, {E1 , E2 },
and {E4 , E5 } are the sets of vertices, SuperVertices, loops, SuperEdges, Hy-
perEdges, and SuperHyperEdges, respectively. By using the Figure (2.3.6) and
the Table (2.4), the neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph is obtained.
In this case, there’s a SuperHyperMatching, namely, {E1 , E4 , E5 , E2 }.
66
2.4. The Setting of Maximum Number of The Neutrosophic Stable Perfect
In the Example (2.3.6), the SuperHyperMatching, namely, {E1 , E4 , E5 , E2 },

is proper. The term “proper” is referred to the case where edges, SuperEdges,
HyperEdges, and SuperHyperEdges have no common endpoints with the
exception in which the vertices and their SuperVertices could be endpoints for
same SuperEdges, HyperEdges, and SuperHyperEdges.
Definition 2.3.7. Assume a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then
(i) : two vertices are isolated if there’s no edge amid them;
(ii) : two vertices are HyperIsolated if there’s no HyperEdge amid them;
(iii) : two vertices or SuperVertices are SuperIsolated if there’s no SuperEdge

amid them;
(iv) : two vertices or SuperVertices are SuperHyperIsolated if there’s no

SuperHyperEdge amid them;
(v) : a notion holds if the connections amid points are all edges;
(vi) : a HyperNotion holds if the set of connections amid points contains at

least one HyperEdges;
(vii) : a SuperNotion holds if the connections amid points are all SuperEdges;
(viii) : a SuperHyperNotion holds if the set of connections amid points

contains at least one SuperHyperEdges;
(ix) : If the connections amid vertices and the SuperVertices include them, count
one time then the notion is SuperHyperProper;
Assume there’s a point which connects to all other points and there’s no
connection more.
(x) : it’s a star if the connections amid points are all edges;
(xi) : it’s a HyperStar if the set of connections amid points contains at least
one HyperEdges;
(xii) : it’s a SuperStar if the connections amid points are all SuperEdges;
(xiii) : it’s a SuperHyperStar if the set of connections amid points contains at

least one SuperHyperEdges.
A SuperHyperStar is illustrated in the Example (2.4.1).
67
2. Modified Notions



94TBL5
2.4 The Setting of Maximum Number of The Neutrosophic

Stable Perfect
The natural extension is concerned to find minimum number of neutrosophic

notions. Since the maximum number is always the number of vertices or
neutrosophic number [which could be defined in different ways] of vertices.
94EXM5 Example 2.4.1. In Figure (2.5), the SuperHyperGraph is highlighted and

featured. By using the Figure (2.4.1) and the Table (2.5), the neutrosophic
SuperHyperGraph is obtained.
In this case, there’s the minimum SuperHyperDominating, namely, {E, V5 }.
68
2.5. The Setting of Maximum Number of The Neutrosophic Dual Perfect



94TBL6
2.5 The Setting of Maximum Number of The Neutrosophic

Dual Perfect

In this case, there’s the maximum dual perfect SuperHyperDominating set,
namely, {V11 , V12 , V13 , V14 , V15 , V16 , V17 , V18 , V19 , V20 , V22 }.

In this case, there’s the maximum dual perfect SuperHyperDominating set,
69
2. Modified Notions



94TBL7

Notions

Total Perfect
Since there’s a possibility to have an SuperHyperEdge contains multiple Super-
Vertices, instead of selecting a SuperVertex, the section of a SuperHyperEdge
is substituted in the Definition of SuperHyperDominating. In the context of
perfect, finding unique SuperHyperEdge is only matter.
In this case, there’s the minimum total perfect SuperHyperDominating set,
namely, {V12 , V13 , V14 }.
70
2.8. The Setting of Minimum Number of The Neutrosophic Connected Perfect



94TBL8

In this case, there’s the minimum total perfect SuperHyperDominating set,

Connected Perfect
tured. By using the Figure (2.8.1) and the Table (2.10), the neutrosophic
In this case, there’s the minimum connected perfect SuperHyperDominating
set, namely, {V12 , V13 , V14 } but neither of minimum total perfect SuperHy-
perDominating set, minimum dual perfect SuperHyperDominating set and
71
2. Modified Notions



94TBL9


94TBL10
72
2.9. The Setting of The Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving



94TBL11
minimum stable perfect SuperHyperDominating set.
2.9 The Setting of The Neutrosophic

SuperHyperResolving
The Definitions of the terms in this section are referred by the previous chapter.

In this case, there’s the minimum SuperHyperResolving set, namely,
{V4 , V5 , V6 }. It’s also minimum perfect SuperHyperResolving set, minimum
dual SuperHyperResolving set and minimum connected SuperHyperResolving
set but not minimum stable SuperHyperResolving set.
73
2. Modified Notions

SuperHyperResolving in the Example (2.9.1) 94NHG11


94TBL12

{V4 , V5 , V6 }. It’s also minimum perfect SuperHyperResolving set and minimum
stable SuperHyperResolving set.
Example 2.9.3.
{V4 , V5 , V6 }. It’s also minimum perfect SuperHyperResolving set and minimum
total SuperHyperResolving set.
74


75
2. Modified Notions


94TBL13

In this case, there’s the minimum SuperHyperResolving set, namely, {V3 }.
It’s also minimum perfect SuperHyperResolving set and minimum total
SuperHyperResolving set. There’s the minimum dual SuperHyperResolving set,
namely, {V1 , V2 }.
76


94TBL14



94TBL15
In this case, there’s the minimum SuperHyperResolving set, namely, {V5 }.
It’s also minimum perfect SuperHyperResolving set and minimum total
SuperHyperResolving set. There’s the minimum dual SuperHyperResolving set,
namely, {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 }.
77
2. Modified Notions



94TBL16

{V1 , V3 , V4 , V5 , V7 , V8 , V9 , V10 , V12 , V13 , V14 , V15 , V16 , V18 , V19 , V20 , V21 }. It’s also
the minimum dual SuperHyperResolving set, namely, {V2 , V6 , V11 , V17 , V22 }.
{V29 , V3 , V4 , V5 , V7 , V8 , V9 , V10 , V12 , V13 , V14 , V15 , V16 , V18 ,

V19 , V20 , V21 , V23 , V24 , V25 , V26 , V27 , V28 }.
It’s also the minimum dual SuperHyperResolving set, namely, {V1 , V2 , V6 , V11 , V17 , V22 }.
78



94TBL17

{V29 , V3 , V4 , V5 , V7 , V8 , V9 , V10 , V12 , V13 , V14 , V15 , V16 , V18 , V19 , V20 , V21 , V23 , V24 , V25 , V26 , V27 , V28 }.
It’s also the ,minimum dual SuperHyperResolving set, namely, {V1 , V2 , V6 , V11 , V17 , V22 }.
Definition 2.9.10. Assume a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. In the terms of
SuperHyperResolving, there’s are some SuperHyperClasses as follows.
(i). it’s R-SuperHyperPath if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection

amid two given SuperHyperEdges with two exceptions as illustrated in
the Example (2.9.9);
(ii). it’s R-SuperHyperCycle if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection

amid two given SuperHyperEdges as illustrated in the Example (2.9.11);
(iii). it’s R-SuperHyperStar it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid

all SuperHyperEdges as illustrated in the Example (2.9.12);
79
2. Modified Notions



94TBL18
(iv). it’s R-SuperHyperBipartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection

amid two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming two
separate sets, has no SuperHyperEdge in common as illustrated in the
Example (2.9.13);
(v). it’s R-SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersec-

tion amid two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming
multi separate sets, has no SuperHyperEdge in common as illustrated in
the Example (2.9.14);
(vi). it’s R-SuperHyperWheel if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection

amid two given SuperHyperEdges and one SuperVertex has one Super-
HyperEdge with any common SuperVertex as illustrated in the Example
(2.9.15);
80



94TBL19

In this case, there’s the minimum SuperHyperResolving set as illustrated in
the Figure (2.19).
the Figure (2.20).
81
2. Modified Notions



94TBL20


94TBL21
82



94TBL22
the Figure (2.21).

the Figure (2.22).
94EXM23 Example 2.9.15. In the Figure (2.23), the SuperHyperGraph is highlighted and
the Figure (2.23).
Definition 2.9.16. Assume a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. An interior
SuperHyperVertex is a SuperHyperVertex which is contained in only one
SuperHyperEdge.
83
2. Modified Notions




94TBL23
84
Definition 2.9.17. Assume a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. An exterior

SuperHyperVertex is a SuperHyperVertex which is contained in more than
one SuperHyperEdge.
Definition 2.9.18. Assume a neutrosophic SuperHyperPath. A SuperHyper-
Leaf is a SuperHyperVertex which is contained in a SuperHyperEdge connects
to only one SuperHyperEdge.
Definition 2.9.19. Assume a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. A SuperHy-
perCenter is a SuperHyperVertex which is contained in any SuperHyperEdge
contains SuperHyperVertex.
Definition 2.9.20. Assume a SuperHyperGraph. If two SuperHyperVertices
have same SuperHyperEdge, then these SuperHyperVertices are said to be
SuperHyperNeighbors.
Definition 2.9.21. Assume a SuperHyperGraph. If two SuperHyperVertices
have same SuperHyperNeighbors, then these SuperHyperVertices are said to be
SuperHyperTwins.
Definition 2.9.22. Assume a SuperHyperGraph. The minimum number of
SuperHyperEdges amid two SuperHyperVertices is said to be SuperHyper-
Distance amid them.
Proposition 2.9.23. Assume a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. The minimum
SuperHyperResolving set contains all interior SuperHyperVertices.
Proof. Consider a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. All interior SuperHyperVer-

tices with related exterior SuperHyperVertices have the SuperHyperDistance
one. Thus one of them could only be out of the minimum SuperHyperResolving
set.
Proposition 2.9.24. Assume a neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPath. The minimum

SuperHyperResolving set contains only one of SuperHyperLeaves.
Proof. Consider a neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPath. Assume A is a Super-

HyperLeaf. Then there are new arrangements of SuperHyperVertices such
that SuperHyperDistance amid them with SuperHyperLeaf is distinct where
SuperHyperVertices are neither interior SuperHyperVertex nor exterior Super-
HyperVertex more than one.
Definition 2.9.25. Assume a SuperHyperCycle. If two SuperHyperVertices

have same SuperHyperDistance with any two given SuperHyperVertices, then
these SuperHyperVertices are said to be SuperHyperAntipodals.
Proposition 2.9.26. Assume a neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle. The minimum
SuperHyperResolving set contains two exterior SuperHyperVertices have only
one SuperHyperEdge in common [and not more].
Proof. Assume a neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle. Two exterior SuperHyper-

Vertices have only one SuperHyperEdge in common [and not more] aren’t the
SuperHyperAntipodals. Thus the SuperHyperVertices such that SuperHyper-
Distance amid them with at least one of these two exterior SuperHyperVertices
is distinct where SuperHyperVertices are neither interior SuperHyperVertex nor
exterior SuperHyperVertex more than one.
85
2. Modified Notions
Proposition 2.9.27. Assume a neutrosophic R-SuperHyperStar. The minimum

SuperHyperResolving set contains all exterior SuperHyperVertices excluding the
SuperHyperCenter and another SuperHyperVertex.
Proof. Assume a neutrosophic R-SuperHyperStar. All SuperHyperVertices are

the SuperHyperTwins with the only exception the SuperHyperCenter. Thus one
of SuperHyperTwins could be only out of minimum SuperHyperResolving
set. Any given SuperHyperVertex in the minimum SuperHyperResolving
set has the SuperHyperDistance one with the SuperHyperCenter and the
SuperHyperDistance two with the latter SuperHyperVertex.
Proposition 2.9.28. Assume a neutrosophic R-SuperHyperBipartite. The

minimum SuperHyperResolving set contains all exterior SuperHyperVertices
excluding two SuperHyperVertices in different parts.
Proof. Assume a neutrosophic R-SuperHyperBipartite. All SuperHyperVertices

are the SuperHyperTwins in the same parts. Thus one of SuperHyperTwins could
be only out of minimum SuperHyperResolving set. Any given SuperHyperVertex
in the minimum SuperHyperResolving set has the SuperHyperDistance one with
the SuperHyperVertex in different part and the SuperHyperDistance two with
the SuperHyperVertex in same part. Thus the minimum SuperHyperResolving
set contains all exterior SuperHyperVertices excluding two SuperHyperVertices
in different parts.
Proposition 2.9.29. Assume a neutrosophic R-SuperHyperMultiPartite. The

minimum SuperHyperResolving set contains all exterior SuperHyperVertices
excluding two SuperHyperVertices in different parts.
Proof. Assume a neutrosophic R-SuperHyperMultiPartite. All SuperHyperVer-

tices are the SuperHyperTwins in the same parts. Thus one of SuperHyperTwins
could be only out of minimum SuperHyperResolving set. Any given SuperHyper-
Vertex in the minimum SuperHyperResolving set has the SuperHyperDistance
one with the SuperHyperVertex in different part and the SuperHyperDistance
two with the SuperHyperVertex in same part. Thus the minimum Super-
HyperResolving set contains all exterior SuperHyperVertices excluding two
SuperHyperVertices in different parts.
Proposition 2.9.30. Assume a neutrosophic R-SuperHyperWheel. The min-

imum SuperHyperResolving set contains all exterior SuperHyperVertices exclud-
ing three SuperHyperVertices, namely, two SuperHyperVertices have only one
SuperHyperEdge in common [and not more] and the SuperHyperCenter.
Proof. Assume a neutrosophic R-SuperHyperWheel. Any given SuperHyper-

Vertex in the minimum SuperHyperResolving set has the SuperHyperDistance
one with its SuperHyperNeighbors and the SuperHyperDistance two with the
other SuperHyperVertex. Thus the minimum SuperHyperResolving set contains
all exterior SuperHyperVertices excluding three SuperHyperVertices, namely,
two SuperHyperVertices have only one SuperHyperEdge in common [and not
more] and the SuperHyperCenter.
86
2.10. Some Results on Neutrosophic Classes Via Minimum
SuperHyperDominating Set
2.10 Some Results on Neutrosophic Classes Via Minimum
SuperHyperDominating Set
Proposition 2.10.1. Assume a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. A SuperHyper-
Vertex SuperHyperDominates if and only if it has SuperHyperDistance one.
Proposition 2.10.2. Assume a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. The minimum
SuperHyperDominating set contains only SuperHyperVertices with SuperHyper-
Distances one from other SuperHyperVertices.
Proposition 2.10.3. Assume a neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPath. The minimum
Distances at least n over 3.
Proof. Consider a neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPath. Any SuperHyperVertex

has two SuperHyperNeighbors with the exceptions SuperHyperLeaves. Thus
any SuperHyperVertex has two SuperHyperVertices with SuperHyperDistances
one with the exceptions SuperHyperLeaves. SuperHyperVertices with Super-
HyperDistances. The SuperHyperVertices are consecutive. Thus the minimum
SuperHyperDominating set contains only SuperHyperVertices with SuperHy-
perDistances at least n over 3.
Proposition 2.10.4. Assume a neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle. The minimum

Distances at least n over 3.
Proof. Assume a neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle. Any SuperHyperVertex

has two SuperHyperNeighbors. Thus any SuperHyperVertex has two SuperHy-
perVertices with SuperHyperDistances one. SuperHyperVertices with Super-
HyperDistances. The SuperHyperVertices are consecutive. Thus the minimum
SuperHyperDominating set contains only SuperHyperVertices with SuperHy-
perDistances at least n over 3.

SuperHyperDominating set contains only the SuperHyperCenter.
Proof. Assume a neutrosophic R-SuperHyperStar. The SuperHyperCenter is

SuperHyperNeighbor with all SuperHyperVertices. Thus SuperHyperCenter
with any SuperHyperVertex has SuperHyperDistances one. Thus the minimum
Proposition 2.10.6. Assume a neutrosophic R-SuperHyperBipartite. The

minimum SuperHyperDominating set contains only two SuperHyperVertices
in different parts.
Proof. Assume a neutrosophic R-SuperHyperBipartite. The SuperHyperVertex

is SuperHyperNeighbor with all SuperHyperVertices in opposite part. Thus
SuperHyperVertex with SuperHyperVertex in opposite part has SuperHyper-
Distances one. The minimum SuperHyperDominating set contains only two
87
2. Modified Notions

minimum SuperHyperDominating set contains only two SuperHyperVertices in
different parts.
Proof. Assume a neutrosophic R-SuperHyperMultiPartite. The SuperHyper-

Vertex is SuperHyperNeighbor with all SuperHyperVertices in opposite part.
Thus SuperHyperVertex with SuperHyperVertex in opposite part has SuperHy-
perDistances one. The minimum SuperHyperDominating set contains only two

imum SuperHyperDominating set contains only the SuperHyperCenter.
Proof. Assume a neutrosophic R-SuperHyperWheel. The SuperHyperCenter

is SuperHyperNeighbor with all SuperHyperVertices. Thus SuperHyperCenter
with any SuperHyperVertex has SuperHyperDistances one. Thus the minimum
2.11 Minimum SuperHyperDominating Set and Minimum

Perfect SuperHyperDominating Set
SuperHyperDominating set is minimum perfect SuperHyperDominating set.
Proposition 2.11.2. Assume a neutrosophic R-SuperHyperBipartite. The min-
imum SuperHyperDominating set is minimum perfect SuperHyperDominating
set.
minimum SuperHyperDominating set is minimum perfect SuperHyperDominat-
ing set.
imum SuperHyperDominating set is minimum perfect SuperHyperDominating
set.
2.12 Applications in Game Theory

In this section, two applications are proposed for the minimum SuperHyper-
Dominating set and the minimum SuperHyperResolving set in the field of game
theory concerning multiple players using winning strategy to tackle each other.
Game theory is the vast section for study. The majority of approaches is about
using the strategies to win the game.
Step 1. (Definition) There are some points and the connections between either
them or group of them. This game is used in the multiple version of
players. Multi players use this game-board. The game is about finding
winning strategies to have proper set. The set with minimum number
of elements which has special attributes. The set isn’t unique thus it’s
possible to have many winners and even more there’s a case in that, all
players are winners and there’s no loser. There are two different types
of this game. Firstly, the set has the points which connect to all other
88
2.12. Applications in Game Theory
vertices. Secondly, the set has the points which has different minimum
number of connections amid any two given vertices from all other vertices.
Step 2. (Issue) In both versions of game, the issue is to find the optimal set.
Every player tries to form the optimal set to win the game. The set isn’t
unique thus designing appropriate strategies to find the intended set is
the matter.
Step 3. (Model) The models uses different types of colors and lines to illustrate
the situation. Sometimes naming the group of points and the connection,
is rarely done since to have concentration on the specific elements. The
number of points and groups of points in the connection isn’t the matter.
Thus it’s possible to have some groups of points and some points in one
connection.
Case 1: The Game Theory contains the Game-Board In the

Terms of the minimum SuperHyperDominating set
Step 4. (Solution) The optimal set has 17 number of elements. Thus the play-
ers find these types of set. In what follows, all optimal sets are obtained.
There 27 optimal sets. If one of them is chosen, the corresponded player
is winner. In other viewpoint, If there are 27 players, then every player
could be winner, if there are 28 players, then one player is loser and so
on. In what follows, the mathematical terminologies and mathematical
structures explains the ways in the strategies of winning are found in
specific model.
In Figure (2.24), the SuperHyperGraph is highlighted and featured. The
sets, {A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O}, {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 }, {E3 }, {E1 },
and {E2 , E4 } are the sets of vertices, SuperVertices, edges, HyperEdges,
and SuperHyperEdges, respectively. The SuperVertices V1 , V2 and V4
SuperHyperDominate each other by the SuperHyperEdge E4 . The Super-
Vertex V3 doesn’t SuperHyperDominate. The vertices G and J dominate
each other by the edge E3 . The vertices A, B, C, D, E, F, G, I, J, K, L, M,
and N HyperDominate each other by the SuperHyperEdge E4 . The
vertices H and O HyperDominate each other by the HyperEdge E1 .
The set of vertices and SuperVertices, {A, H, V1 , V3 } is minimal Super-
HyperDominating set. The minimum SuperHyperDominating number
is 17. The sets of vertices and SuperVertices, which are listed below, are
the minimal SuperHyperDominating sets corresponded to the minimum
SuperHyperDominating number which is 17.
{A, H, V1 , V3 }, {M, H, V1 , V3 }, {B, H, V1 , V3 }, {C, H, V1 , V3 }, {L, H, V1 , V3 },

{D, H, V1 , V3 }, {E, H, V1 , V3 }, {N, H, V1 , V3 }, {A, H, V2 , V3 }, {M, H, V2 , V3 },
{B, H, V2 , V3 }, {C, H, V2 , V3 }, {L, H, V2 , V3 }, {D, H, V2 , V3 }, {E, H, V2 , V3 },
{N, H, V2 , V3 }, {A, O, V1 , V3 }, {M, O, V1 , V3 }, {B, O, V1 , V3 }, {C, O, V1 , V3 },
{L, O, V1 , V3 }, {D, O, V1 , V3 }, {E, O, V1 , V3 }, {N, O, V1 , V3 }, {A, O, V2 , V3 },
{M, O, V2 , V3 }, {B, O, V2 , V3 }, {C, O, V2 , V3 }, {L, O, V2 , V3 }, {D, O, V2 , V3 },
{E, O, V2 , V3 }, {N, O, V2 , V3 }.
89
2. Modified Notions

SuperHyperDominating. 94NHG14

SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph.

94TBL14
By using the Figure (2.24) and the Table (2.24), the neutrosophic
(i) : The vertex A SuperHyperDominates M, I and G by using three

SuperHyperEdges E1 , E2 , and E4 .
(ii) : The vertex A SuperHyperDominates B, J, K, L, and F by using two
SuperHyperEdges E2 , and E4 .
(iii) : The vertex A SuperHyperDominates C, D, E, H, and N by using
one SuperHyperEdge E4 .
There are some points for the vertex H as follows.
(i) : The vertex H SuperHyperDominates A, M, G, and O by using one

SuperHyperEdge E1 .

SuperHyperEdge E4 .
90
2.12. Applications in Game Theory

SuperHyperResolving. 94NHG25

Case 2: The Game Theory contains the Game-Board In the

Terms of the minimum SuperHyperResolving set
Step 4. (Solution) The optimal set has twenty-three elements. One of winning
set is featured as follows. The specific model of game-board is illustrated
in the Figure (2.25). In what follows, the winning strategies are formed in
the mathematical literatures. If the number of players exceeds from the
number of optimal sets, then there’s amount of losers which the difference
amid the number of players and the number of optimal sets. If the number
doesn’t exceed, then there’s a possibility to have no amount of losers.
This game-board seems so hard since the winner has to find a specific set
with twenty-three elements.
In Figure (2.25), the SuperHyperGraph is highlighted and featured.
By using the Figure (2.25) and the Table (2.25), the neutrosophic
{V29 , V3 , V4 , V5 , V7 , V8 , V9 , V10 , V12 , V13 , V14 , V15 , V16 , V18 ,

V19 , V20 , V21 , V23 , V24 , V25 , V26 , V27 , V28 }.
91
2. Modified Notions

SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph.

94TBL25
2.13 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.
The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs facilitate the environment with the dense
styles of objects thus the questions and the problems in this topic could open
the ways to have new directions and more applications.
In this study, some notions are defined in the framework of neutrosophic
SuperHyperGraphs. SuperHyperResolving and SuperHyperDominating are new
ideas applying in neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs. The keyword in this study
is to find minimum set and the study highlights the results from minimum sets.
Question 2.13.1. How to create some classes of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs

alongside obtaining some results from them?
Question 2.13.2. How to characterize the number one for introduced classes of
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs?
Question 2.13.3. How to characterize the number two for introduced classes of
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs?
Question 2.13.4. How to characterize the number three for introduced classes
of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs?
Problem 2.13.5. Is it possible to find the avenues to pursue this study in
general form such that the results aren’t about classes, in other words, beyond
neutrosophic classes of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs?
Problem 2.13.6. Is it possible to find a real-world problem handling the
situation such that introducing special neutrosophic classes of neutrosophic
SuperHyperGraphs?
Problem 2.13.7. Is it possible to find a real-world problem to define new
environment concerning specific behaviors of results?
2.14 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 some approaches to make neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs
92
2.14. Conclusion and Closing Remarks
more understandable. In this way, some neutrosophic graphs are introduced.

The notion of how much “close” leads us toward the ideas of direct
connections and indirect connections. Direct connection is interpreted by
SuperHyperEdges. When finding the minimum number of SuperHyperVertices
such that they’ve SuperHyperEdges with others, is the matter, the notion
of “SuperHyperDominating” is assigned. But when indirect connections
separate any couple of SuperHyperVertices in the terms of direct connections
forming indirect connections, the notion of “SuperHyperResolving” is sparked.
Some notions are added to both settings of “SuperHyperDominating” and
“SuperHyperResolving”. These notions are duality, perfectness, totality, stable
and connectedness. The existence of direct connections between the elements of
intended set indicates the idea of “connectedness” but the lack of them points
out the concept of “stable”. Acting on itself by intended set introduces the term,
totality but acting reversely is about the word, duality. In all the mentioned
cases, if the intended set acts uniquely, then the prefix, perfect, is assigned to
them. There are some results about these mentioned new notions. Sometimes
some neutrosophic classes of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs based on one of
the notions “SuperHyperDominating” or “SuperHyperResolving” is introduced
to figure out what’s happened to make neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs more
understandable and to make sense about what’s going on in the terms of the
directions. In the future research, the framework will be on the general forms of
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and in this endeavor, the upcoming research
will be formed based on them. In the Table (2.26), some limitations and
Table 2.26: A Brief Overview about Advantages and Limitations of this Study 92tbl
Advantages Limitations
1. Defining Different Versions 1. Defining SuperHyperDominating
2. Defining SuperHyperResolving
3. Neutrosophic Classes 2. General Results
4. Duality, Totality, Connectedness
5. Stable, Perfect 3. Connections Amid Nnotions
advantages of this study are pointed out.
93
Bibliography

App. Eng. Math. 8 (1) (2018) 122-135.
Ref81 [2] Henry Garrett, “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning SuperHyper-
Dominating and Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in SuperHyperGraph”,
ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29173.86244).
Theory 10 (2016) 86-101.
Ref8 [5] Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Co-degree and Neutrosophic Degree along-
side Chromatic Numbers in the Setting of Some Classes Related to Neut-
rosophic Hypergraphs”, J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res 1(1) (2022) 06-14.
Ref10 [6] 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
tems 49 (2022) 531-561 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.6456413).
Ref82 [8] Henry Garrett, “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study
Some Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge
(NSHE) in Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)”, ResearchGate 2022
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.25385.88160).
Press, 2006.
95
Bibliography

33 (2020) 290-296. (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.3783103).
96

Neut. SuperHyperEdges

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

Neut. SuperHyperEdges

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Neut.

Dr. Henry Garrett

In the first chapter, based on neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in

In the second chapter, in this research article, the notions of SuperHyperDom-

The following references are cited by chapters.

[Ref1] Henry Garrett, “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning Neutrosophic

[Ref2] Henry Garrett, “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to

Some studies and researches about neutrosophic graphs, are proposed as

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

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

List of Figures vii

2.1 A Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph Associated to the Notions of

2.18 A Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph Associated to the Notions of

2.1 The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and

2.13 The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and

[Ref2] Henry Garrett, “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to

Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in Neutrosophic

researches about neutrosophic graphs, are proposed as books in Ref. [Ref12]

A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}

A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}.

Definition 1.3.3. The degree of truth-membership, indeterminacy-

TA (X) = min[TA (vi ), TA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈X ,

IA (X) = min[IA (vi ), IA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈X ,

supp(X) = {x ∈ X : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) > 0}.

Definition 1.3.5 (Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). (Ref.[4],Definition

(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued neutrosophic subsets

(ix) and the following conditions hold:

TV0 (Ei0 ) ≤ min[TV 0 (Vi ), TV 0 (Vj )]Vi ,Vj ∈Ei0 ,

IV0 (Ei0 ) ≤ min[IV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vj )]Vi ,Vj ∈Ei0 ,

Here the neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the neutrosophic Supe-

(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex;

1.4 General Forms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph

(iv) If w ≤ x and y ≤ z then w ⊗ y ≤ x ⊗ z.

Definition 1.4.2. The degree of truth-membership, indeterminacy-

TA (X) = Tnorm [TA (vi ), TA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈X ,

IA (X) = Tnorm [IA (vi ), IA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈X ,

supp(X) = {x ∈ X : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) > 0}.

Definition 1.4.4. (General Forms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)).

(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued neutrosophic subsets

(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i =

Here the neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the neutrosophic Supe-

1.5 Relations of Single Valued Neutrosophic Graph and

A single valued neutrosophic graph (SVN-graph) with underlying set V is

0 ≤ TA (vi ) + IA (vi ) + FA (vi ) ≤ 3 for all vi ∈ V (i = 1, 2, . . . , n).

(ii) The functions TB : V × V → [0, 1], IB : V × V → [0, 1], and FB : V × V →

TB ({vi , vj }) ≤ min[TA (vi ), TA (vj )],

IB ({vi , vj }) ≤ min[IA (vi ), IA (vj )],

0 ≤ TB ({vi , vj })+IB ({vi , vj })+FB ({vi , vj }) ≤ 3 for all {vi , vi } ∈ E (i = 1, 2, . . . , n).

We call A the single valued neutrosophic vertex set of V, B the single

1.6 Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)

is called a neutrosophic SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from neutrosophic

(i) Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ;

(ii) there’s a vertex vi ∈ Vi such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ;

(iii) there’s a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi such that Vi0 , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ;

(iv) there’s a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ;

(ix) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1

Definition 1.6.2. (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths).

could be characterized as follow-up items.

(i) If for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | = 2, then NSHP is called path;

(iii) if for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called HyperPath;

(iv) if there are Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | ≥ 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called SuperHy-

Definition 1.6.3. (Neutrosophic Strength of the Neutrosophic SuperHyper-

(vi) neutrosophic bI if I(E) = {I(Vi )}si=1 ;

(vii) neutrosophic bF if F (E) = {F (Vi )}si=1 ;