Filtering Option _DISJOINT and _NOT_DISJOINT for Array Comparison

[PascalStehling]

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Given the following type definition as example, a movie can have multiple Genres (e.g ["Action", "Thriller"])

type Movies {
 genre: [String]
 name: String
}

If I now want to Filter for all Movies that are in a Array of Generes (e.g. ["Horror", "Thriller", "Drama"]), I need to make an Search for each of the generes seperatly, as I can only filter with genre_INCLUDES or genre_NOT_INCLUDES, which only filter by an single Argument, not by an array (https://neo4j.com/docs/graphql-manual/current/filtering/#_array_comparison).

Describe the solution you'd like
A better way would be to have an _DISJOINT and _NOT_DISJOINT filter, with which two arrays can be compared. If the two arrays have no Elements in common they are disjoint and if they have atleast one in common, they are not disjoint. The names come from set theory: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disjoint_sets.

With this you could filter for genre_NOT_DIJSOINT: ["Horror", "Thriller", "Drama"] and would get all Movies where atleast one of these Genres is in common.

Describe alternatives you've considered
The only alternatives are making a request for each of the genres that is searched or creating new Nodes out of these properties (making genre a separate Node) and filtering these seperatly. But this is not possible in all cases (as im currently encountering in a Project). The only real alternative is to build the cypher Query Dynamicly each time and build an construct with with OR and _INCLUDES (e.g. OR: [{genre_INCLUDES: "Horror"}, {genre_INCLUDES: "Thriller"}, {genre_INCLUDES: "Drama"}]). But this makes everything a bit more complicated and is not very pretty,

I hope the Idea is clear enougth and there is not already a method I overlooked.

[magnusart]

from the peanut gallery: perhaps _INTERSECT or _OVERLAP would be better naming candidate than _NOT_DISJOINT?

[PascalStehling]

from the peanut gallery: perhaps _INTERSECT or _OVERLAP would be better naming candidate than _NOT_DISJOINT?

I think it should follow the same naming rules as there are already for array comparison, whitch is one check and the opposite with _NOT in front of it. But the naming could also be turned around to _INTERSECT and _NOT_INTERSECT. I think both (INTERSECT and DISJOINT) are describing the concept well.