Dynamic driving enables independent control of material bits for targeted memory

C.M. Meulblok; E. Gutierrez-Prieto; M. van Hecke; P.M. Reis

REVIEW 3 major objections 1 minor 44 references

Dynamic driving enables independent control of material bits for targeted memory

T0 review · 3 major / 1 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A single global drive cycle can write any configuration of a bistable mechanical memory.

desk verdict The abstract promises a nice idea in mechanical memory, but the submitted full text is an unrelated LLM benchmark, so there is nothing to review; treat this as an invalid submission. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.16257 v2 pith:UPNQC7TV submitted 2025-08-22 cond-mat.soft

E. Gutierrez-Prieto , C.M. Meulblok , M. van Hecke , P.M. Reis This is my paper · ORCID

classification cond-mat.soft

keywords mechanicalmetamaterialsbistableelementsdynamiccontroldriveorbitsthresholdcrossingmemoryaddressabilityrotatingplatform

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper claims that a mechanical memory made of bistable elements can be written in a single global drive cycle, without local per-bit actuation or long multi-step protocols. The strategy converts the drive into an orbit in a control space—angular velocity and acceleration—and rationally designs each element's switching threshold so that the orbit crosses exactly the thresholds of the bits that must flip. A five-bit array of bistable beams on a rotating platform is shown to be fully addressable: one chosen orbit writes each of the 32 configurations, and all 26 uppercase ASCII letters are produced. This matters because it offers a route to remote, single-command writing of mechanical information, potentially transferable to other bistable systems.

What carries the argument

The drive orbit in the (angular velocity, angular acceleration) plane is the central object. State changes occur when the orbit crosses a bit's switching threshold, so writing a desired configuration reduces to selecting an orbit whose intersections with the threshold set match exactly the bits to be flipped. The five bistable beams on the rotating platform are the physical system that makes this control space concrete.

What would settle it

Attempt to write one fixed target pattern from all 32 possible starting configurations using the same designed drive orbit, repeated many times. If the resulting bit state varies with the starting pattern or across repetitions (or if thresholds measured while other bits are in different states shift measurably), the assumption of fixed, independent thresholds fails and the one-orbit-per-state claim is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the switching of bistable elements can be controlled by the global drive's trajectory and its time derivatives, not by acting on individual bits. For bistable beams mounted on a rotating platform, a drive cycle is an orbit in the plane of angular velocity and angular acceleration; a bit flips exactly when the orbit crosses its switching threshold. Because the thresholds are rationally designed, each of the five bits can be addressed by choosing an orbit that intersects only the intended thresholds. The paper demonstrates full addressability: every one of the 32 bit configurations is reachable by some single orbit, and the orbits can be composed to write all 26 upper

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that each bit's switching threshold stays fixed regardless of the current state of the other bits and of drive history, so one orbit can be designed to flip exactly the intended subset; if thresholds shift with the pattern, the single-orbit addressing guarantee collapses.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Any of the 32 configurations of the five-bit memory can be reached in one global drive cycle, removing the need for local actuation or repeated write cycles.
Writing all 26 uppercase ASCII letters demonstrates that the method is not limited to a few hand-picked states: the full address space is accessible.
Because the control signal is the shape of the orbit, the time derivatives of the drive are themselves part of the control input, not a nuisance to be suppressed.
The threshold-crossing logic is general: any physical system with designable bistable switching thresholds could in principle be addressed by a single orbit in its appropriate drive space.
A remotely operated device could be written by one global motion, since no per-bit connection or local probe is needed to set the memory.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

A direct testable extension is to scale beyond five bits; the paper does not show how many bits can be addressed before threshold interactions or fabrication errors make single-orbit design impractical.
The same orbit-construction idea could transfer to other domains—magnetic, acoustic, or optical bistable elements—where a global field with tunable time history replaces the rotating platform's angular acceleration.
If thresholds can be shifted on demand by a secondary field, then the orbit could be fixed while the threshold pattern selects the state, turning the scheme into a reprogrammable threshold-addressable memory rather than an orbit-addressable one.
The paper's demonstration writes letters from a known state; an implicit stronger claim is that the same orbit writes the same target from any initial configuration, which is worth checking explicitly because it tests threshold independence.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

The abstract is genuinely interesting: using a global drive cycle, with sensitivity to the drive and its derivatives, to write arbitrary configurations of bistable bits in one pass is a clean way to sidestep local control. If the five-bit demonstration works, it would be a real step for mechanical memory. But the submission as it stands is unusable — the full text is arXiv:2508.16260, a paper on LLM tool-use benchmarking, with nothing about beams, thresholds, rotating platforms, or ASCII letters. I cannot check a single claim, and that is not a minor formatting slip; it is the whole paper missing.

What little I can assess from the abstract: the framing is new relative to typical multi-cycle or local-control schemes, and the 26-letter ASCII demonstration would be a compelling existence proof if we could see the data. Unfortunately, even the abstract alone leaves a load-bearing assumption unstated: the switching thresholds must be effectively independent of the current bit pattern and of drive history, so that one orbit can be designed per target state without crosstalk. In a coupled bistable array, snap-through of one beam changes the force landscape for its neighbors, so this independence needs either an argument from the physics or a measured error budget. The abstract just says thresholds are ‘rationally designed.’ Without the derivation or experiments, that is a hole big enough to drive a truck through.

I want to be fair: the idea has merit, and the authors may well have done the work. But the text I was given does not contain that work. I cannot verify the methods, the data, the error analysis, or even whether the approach reduces to a known technique. There is no point in sending this to a referee as if it were a paper. The right move is to return it to the authors and ask them to submit the actual manuscript. If they do, I would happily look again, because the concept deserves a serious look — just not on this submission.

Referee Report

3 major / 1 minor

Summary. The abstract claims a dynamic control strategy for mechanical metamaterials with bistable elements: by rotating a platform hosting bistable beams, drive cycles become orbits in an angular-velocity/acceleration control space, and crossing "rationally designed" switching thresholds writes any configuration in a single global drive cycle. The abstract further claims a five-bit system with full addressability, demonstrated by writing all 26 uppercase ASCII letters. However, the supplied full text is an unrelated paper, "MCPVerse: An Expansive, Real-World Benchmark for Agentic Tool Use" (arXiv:2508.16260). That text contains no equations, no beam model, no threshold design, no experimental protocol, no five-bit system, and no demonstration of ASCII writing. The submission therefore consists of an abstract alone, and the paper's central claims cannot be checked from the available material.

Significance. If the claimed result held, it would be significant: a single global drive cycle that can write any configuration of a bistable array would be a useful step toward remotely operated mechanical memory with minimal local actuation. The abstract-level idea is interesting and falsifiable. However, significance cannot be assessed from the submitted manuscript because none of the supporting technical content is present. There are no machine-checked proofs, reproducible code, parameter-free derivations, or experimental data in the supplied text; the body is an unrelated benchmark paper.

major comments (3)

[Full text] The submitted full text is arXiv:2508.16260, a paper on LLM tool-use benchmarking. It contains none of the claimed content: no bistable beams, no rotating-platform setup, no switching thresholds, no five-bit system, no ASCII demonstration, and no equations of motion or control-space analysis. The central claim that any configuration can be accessed by a single global drive cycle is therefore entirely unsupported in this submission. This is a load-bearing omission that prevents any technical evaluation.
[Abstract] Even taking the abstract at face value, the assertion that switching thresholds can be 'rationally designed so that each state can be accessed by a single drive orbit' requires a derivation or at least an argument that the thresholds are configuration-independent. The reader's stress-test concern is directly relevant: in a coupled bistable array, the effective threshold of one beam can shift when a neighbor snaps through, because local stresses change. The abstract gives no reason that such shifts are absent or compensated, and the full text does not address the issue. Without this, the claim that one orbit written for one configuration remains valid for all 26 target configurations is not established.
[Abstract / Full text] The claimed demonstration—writing all 26 uppercase letters in ASCII—requires at minimum a protocol and a success criterion: number of trials, repeatability, and robustness to small variations in drive parameters or fabrication tolerances. No such data appear anywhere in the submission. The absence of any experimental detail, error analysis, or even a schematic makes the central experimental claim unverifiable.

minor comments (1)

[Abstract] The phrase 'material bits' is used without definition; if the paper is resubmitted with the correct full text, this should be defined at first use. In addition, 'we overcome this limitation' refers to an unspecified prior limitation; a precise citation would help.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity is demonstrable from the abstract; the supplied full text is an unrelated manuscript, so the claimed derivation cannot be checked.

full rationale

The provided abstract describes a dynamic drive strategy for bistable beams, with switching thresholds 'rationally designed so that each state can be accessed by a single drive orbit.' This is a design target and an experimental claim; the abstract does not define the demonstrated addressability in terms of the thresholds by construction, nor does it present equations, fitted parameters, or self-citations that would allow a specific circular reduction to be exhibited. The claim that all 26 uppercase letters can be written is presented as an experimental demonstration, not as a prediction mathematically identical to an input. The supplied 'FULL TEXT' is arXiv:2508.16260, a completely unrelated paper on an LLM tool-use benchmark (MCPVerse), and contains none of the bistable-beam model, threshold design, or five-bit experiments described in the abstract. Consequently, no circular step meeting the required standard—quoting text that shows a result reduces by construction to its inputs—can be identified. The skeptical concern about state-dependent switching thresholds is a legitimate verifiability and correctness risk, but it is not evidence of circularity under the stated rules. Therefore the honest finding is no significant circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 2 assumptions · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only; the full text is a different paper, so the design protocol and experimental setup cannot be audited.

free parameters (1)

Switching thresholds of each bistable element
Abstract states these are 'rationally designed' to allow single-orbit access to any state; without the full text, it is unclear whether they are derived from first principles or chosen to match the desired letter outputs.

assumptions (2)

domain assumption The switching of each bistable beam depends only on the instantaneous angular velocity and angular acceleration (i.e., the drive orbit), and not on the history of the drive.
The entire orbit-based control scheme requires that the state changes occur when the orbit crosses thresholds, which assumes a first-order (Markovian) dependence on the drive variables. This is not stated explicitly but is implicit in the abstract's description.
domain assumption Switching thresholds for different bits are independent of the current state of the array.
To write any configuration with a single orbit, the threshold of each bit must not depend on whether other bits have already flipped. The abstract does not state this, but it is a necessary condition for the claimed full addressability.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Dynamic driving enables independent control of material bits for targeted memory." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/UPNQC7TV

@misc{pith2026250816257,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Dynamic driving enables independent control of material bits for targeted memory},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/UPNQC7TV}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.16257}
}

read the original abstract

Mechanical metamaterials with bistable elements can store vast amounts of information, but writing these memories requires impractical local control or lengthy multi-cycle protocols. We overcome this limitation with a dynamic control strategy that accesses any configuration in a single global drive cycle by leveraging the system's sensitivity to the drive and its time derivatives. We realize this strategy with bistable beams on a rotating platform, where drive cycles become orbits in a control space of angular velocity and acceleration. State changes occur when these orbits cross switching thresholds, which we rationally design so that each state can be accessed by a single drive orbit. We construct a five-bit system and demonstrate its full addressability by selecting drive orbits that write all 26 uppercase letters of the alphabet in ASCII representation. This dynamic control paradigm offers a general route towards smart, remotely operated devices across various physical domains.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 41 canonical work pages

[1]

Bense \ and\ author M

author author H. Bense \ and\ author M. van Hecke ,\ @noop journal journal Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. \ volume 118 ,\ pages e2111436118 ( year 2021 ) NoStop

work page 2021
[2]

Liu , author S

author author W. Liu , author S. Janbaz , author D. Dykstra , author B. Ennis ,\ and\ author C. Coulais ,\ @noop journal journal Nature \ volume 634 ,\ pages 842 ( year 2024 ) NoStop

work page 2024
[3]

author author L. J. \ Kwakernaak \ and\ author M. van Hecke ,\ @noop journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 130 ,\ pages 268204 ( year 2023 ) NoStop

work page 2023
[4]

Mungan , author S

author author M. Mungan , author S. Sastry , author K. Dahmen ,\ and\ author I. Regev ,\ @noop journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 123 ,\ pages 178002 ( year 2019 ) NoStop

work page 2019
[5]

van Hecke ,\ @noop journal journal Phys

author author M. van Hecke ,\ @noop journal journal Phys. Rev. E \ volume 104 ,\ pages 054608 ( year 2021 ) NoStop

work page 2021
[6]

author author N. C. \ Keim \ and\ author J. D. \ Paulsen ,\ @noop journal journal Sci. Adv. \ volume 7 ,\ pages eabg7685 ( year 2021 ) NoStop

work page 2021
[7]

author author C. W. \ Lindeman \ and\ author S. R. \ Nagel ,\ @noop journal journal Sci. Adv. \ volume 7 ,\ pages eabg7133 ( year 2021 ) NoStop

work page 2021
[8]

Ding \ and\ author M

author author J. Ding \ and\ author M. van Hecke ,\ @noop journal journal J. Chem. Phys. \ volume 156 ,\ pages 204902 ( year 2022 ) NoStop

work page 2022

Show all 44 references

[9]

Shohat , author D

author author D. Shohat , author D. Hexner ,\ and\ author Y. Lahini ,\ @noop journal journal Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. \ volume 119 ,\ pages e2200028119 ( year 2022 ) NoStop

2022
[10]

Melancon , author A

author author D. Melancon , author A. Forte , author L. Kamp , author B. Gorissen ,\ and\ author K. Bertoldi ,\ @noop journal journal Adv. Funct. Mater. \ volume 32 ( year 2022 ) NoStop

2022
[11]

Jules , author A

author author T. Jules , author A. Reid , author K. E. \ Daniels , author M. Mungan ,\ and\ author F. Lechenault ,\ @noop journal journal Phys. Rev. Res. \ volume 4 ,\ pages 013128 ( year 2022 ) NoStop

2022
[12]

author author C. W. \ Lindeman , author T. R. \ Jalowiec ,\ and\ author N. C. \ Keim ,\ @noop journal journal Sci. Adv. \ volume 11 ,\ pages eadr5933 ( year 2025 ) NoStop

2025
[13]

author author J. L. \ Silverberg , author A. A. \ Evans , author L. McLeod , author R. C. \ Hayward , author T. Hull , author C. D. \ Santangelo ,\ and\ author I. Cohen ,\ @noop journal journal Science \ volume 345 ,\ pages 647 ( year 2014 ) NoStop

2014
[14]

Chen , author M

author author T. Chen , author M. Pauly ,\ and\ author P. M. \ Reis ,\ @noop journal journal Nature \ volume 589 ,\ pages 386 ( year 2021 ) NoStop

2021
[15]

Mirzajanzadeh \ and\ author D

author author M. Mirzajanzadeh \ and\ author D. Pasini ,\ @noop journal journal Sci. Adv. \ volume 11 ,\ pages eadu4678 ( year 2025 ) NoStop

2025
[16]

author author E. T. \ Filipov , author T. Tachi ,\ and\ author G. H. \ Paulino ,\ @noop journal journal Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. \ volume 112 ,\ pages 12321 ( year 2015 ) NoStop

2015
[17]

Guseinov , author C

author author R. Guseinov , author C. McMahan , author J. Pérez , author C. Daraio ,\ and\ author B. Bickel ,\ @noop journal journal Nat. Commun. \ volume 11 ,\ pages 237 ( year 2020 ) NoStop

2020
[18]

author author A. S. \ Meeussen \ and\ author M. van Hecke ,\ @noop journal journal Nature \ volume 621 ,\ pages 516 ( year 2023 ) NoStop

2023
[19]

author author M. A. \ McEvoy \ and\ author N. Correll ,\ @noop journal journal Science \ volume 347 ,\ pages 1261689 ( year 2015 ) NoStop

2015
[20]

Kaspar , author B

author author C. Kaspar , author B. J. \ Ravoo , author W. G. \ van der Wiel , author S. V. \ Wegner ,\ and\ author W. H. P. \ Pernice ,\ @noop journal journal Nature \ volume 594 ,\ pages 345 ( year 2021 ) NoStop

2021
[21]

Yasuda , author P

author author H. Yasuda , author P. R. \ Buskohl , author A. Gillman , author T. D. \ Murphey , author S. Stepney , author R. A. \ Vaia ,\ and\ author J. R. \ Raney ,\ @noop journal journal Nature \ volume 598 ,\ pages 39 ( year 2021 ) NoStop

2021
[22]

El Helou , author B

author author C. El Helou , author B. Grossmann , author C. E. \ Tabor , author P. R. \ Buskohl ,\ and\ author R. L. \ Harne ,\ @noop journal journal Nature \ volume 608 ,\ pages 699 ( year 2022 ) NoStop

2022
[23]

Sirote-Katz , author D

author author C. Sirote-Katz , author D. Shohat , author C. Merrigan , author Y. Lahini , author C. Nisoli ,\ and\ author Y. Shokef ,\ @noop journal journal Nat. Commun. \ volume 15 ,\ pages 4008 ( year 2024 ) NoStop

2024
[24]

author author C. M. \ Meulblok , author A. Singh , author M. Labousse ,\ and\ author M. van Hecke ,\ @noop journal journal arXiv \ ,\ pages 2503.07764 ( year 2025 ) NoStop

2025 arXiv
[25]

author author M. M. \ Terzi \ and\ author M. Mungan ,\ @noop journal journal Phys. Rev. E \ volume 102 ,\ pages 012122 ( year 2020 ) NoStop

2020
[26]

Guerra , author A

author author A. Guerra , author A. C. \ Slim , author D. P. \ Holmes ,\ and\ author O. Kodio ,\ @noop journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 130 ,\ pages 148201 ( year 2023 ) NoStop

2023
[27]

author author C. M. \ Meulblok \ and\ author M. van Hecke ,\ @noop journal journal arXiv \ ,\ pages 2505.09517 ( year 2025 ) NoStop

2025 arXiv
[28]

Gutierrez-Prieto , author M

author author E. Gutierrez-Prieto , author M. Gomez ,\ and\ author P. M. \ Reis ,\ @noop journal journal Extreme Mech. Lett. \ volume 72 ,\ pages 102246 ( year 2024 ) NoStop

2024
[29]

author author R. V. \ Mises ,\ @noop journal journal Z. Angew. Math. Mech. \ volume 3 ,\ pages 406 ( year 1923 ) NoStop

1923
[30]

author author P. X. \ Bellini ,\ @noop journal journal Int. J. Non-Linear Mech. \ volume 7 ,\ pages 643 ( year 1972 ) NoStop

1972
[31]

Bazant \ and\ author L

author author Z. Bazant \ and\ author L. Cedolin ,\ @noop title Stability of Structures: Elastic, Inelastic, Fracture and Damage Theories \ ( publisher WORLD SCIENTIFIC ,\ year 2010 )\ pp.\ pages 1--1012 NoStop

2010
[32]

1 NoStop

International Organization for Standardization,\ @noop title Iso iec 8859-1:1998 ( year 1998 ),\ note 8-bit single-byte coded graphic character sets -- Part 1: Latin alphabet No. 1 NoStop

1998
[33]

author author D. M. J. \ Dykstra , author J. Busink , author B. Ennis ,\ and\ author C. Coulais ,\ @noop journal journal J. Appl. Mech. \ volume 86 ,\ pages 111012 ( year 2019 ) NoStop

2019
[34]

author author D. M. J. \ Dykstra , author S. Janbaz ,\ and\ author C. Coulais ,\ @noop journal journal APL Mater. \ volume 10 ,\ pages 080702 ( year 2022 ) NoStop

2022
[35]

Jules , author L

author author T. Jules , author L. Michel , author A. Douin ,\ and\ author F. Lechenault ,\ @noop journal journal Commun. Phys., \ volume 6 ,\ pages 25 ( year 2023 ) NoStop

2023
[36]

author author C. W. \ Lindeman , author V. F. \ Hagh , author C. I. \ Ip ,\ and\ author S. R. \ Nagel ,\ @noop journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 130 ,\ pages 197201 ( year 2023 ) NoStop

2023
[37]

Jin \ and\ author M

author author L. Jin \ and\ author M. van Hecke ,\ @noop journal journal arXiv \ ,\ pages 2507.02387 ( year 2025 ) NoStop

2025
[38]

author author J. B. \ Geddes , author B. D. \ Storey , author D. Gardner ,\ and\ author R. T. \ Carr ,\ @noop journal journal Phys. Rev. E \ volume 81 ,\ pages 046316 ( year 2010 ) NoStop

2010
[39]

Mart \'i nez-Calvo , author M

author author A. Mart \'i nez-Calvo , author M. D. \ Biviano , author A. H. \ Christensen , author E. Katifori , author K. H. \ Jensen ,\ and\ author M. Ruiz-Garc \'i a ,\ @noop journal journal Nature Commun. \ volume 15 ,\ pages 3121 ( year 2024 ) NoStop

2024
[40]

van Sluijs , author R

author author B. van Sluijs , author R. J. M. \ Maas , author A. J. \ van der Linden , author T. F. A. \ de Greef ,\ and\ author W. T. S. \ Huck ,\ @noop journal journal Nat. Commun. \ volume 13 ,\ pages 3626 ( year 2022 ) NoStop

2022
[41]

author author L. E. \ Altman , author N. Awad , author D. J. \ Durian , author M. Ruiz-Garcia ,\ and\ author E. Katifori ,\ @noop journal journal arXiv \ ,\ pages 2502.05570 ( year 2025 ) NoStop

2025
[42]

Grandgeorge , author T

author author P. Grandgeorge , author T. G. \ Sano ,\ and\ author P. M. \ Reis ,\ @noop journal journal J. Mech. Phys. Solids \ volume 164 ,\ pages 104885 ( year 2022 ) NoStop

2022
[43]

Leroy-Calatayud , author M

author author P. Leroy-Calatayud , author M. Pezzulla , author A. Keiser , author K. Mulleners ,\ and\ author P. M. \ Reis ,\ @noop journal journal Phys. Rev. Fluids \ volume 7 ,\ pages 074403 ( year 2022 ) NoStop

2022
[44]

Aymanns , author E

author author F. Aymanns , author E. And\'o ,\ and\ author V. Uhlmann ,\ https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13358354 title S pline B ox ( year 2024 ),\ note V ersion 0.2.0 NoStop

2024 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Bense \ and\ author M

author author H. Bense \ and\ author M. van Hecke ,\ @noop journal journal Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. \ volume 118 ,\ pages e2111436118 ( year 2021 ) NoStop

work page 2021

[2] [2]

Liu , author S

author author W. Liu , author S. Janbaz , author D. Dykstra , author B. Ennis ,\ and\ author C. Coulais ,\ @noop journal journal Nature \ volume 634 ,\ pages 842 ( year 2024 ) NoStop

work page 2024

[3] [3]

author author L. J. \ Kwakernaak \ and\ author M. van Hecke ,\ @noop journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 130 ,\ pages 268204 ( year 2023 ) NoStop

work page 2023

[4] [4]

Mungan , author S

author author M. Mungan , author S. Sastry , author K. Dahmen ,\ and\ author I. Regev ,\ @noop journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 123 ,\ pages 178002 ( year 2019 ) NoStop

work page 2019

[5] [5]

van Hecke ,\ @noop journal journal Phys

author author M. van Hecke ,\ @noop journal journal Phys. Rev. E \ volume 104 ,\ pages 054608 ( year 2021 ) NoStop

work page 2021

[6] [6]

author author N. C. \ Keim \ and\ author J. D. \ Paulsen ,\ @noop journal journal Sci. Adv. \ volume 7 ,\ pages eabg7685 ( year 2021 ) NoStop

work page 2021

[7] [7]

author author C. W. \ Lindeman \ and\ author S. R. \ Nagel ,\ @noop journal journal Sci. Adv. \ volume 7 ,\ pages eabg7133 ( year 2021 ) NoStop

work page 2021

[8] [8]

Ding \ and\ author M

author author J. Ding \ and\ author M. van Hecke ,\ @noop journal journal J. Chem. Phys. \ volume 156 ,\ pages 204902 ( year 2022 ) NoStop

work page 2022