Magnetic proximity-induced non-relativistic valley polarization

Hui Wang; Weifeng Xie; Xiong Xu; Yiboyang Sun; Yongqi Chen; Yunliang Yue

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 8 references

Magnetic proximity-induced non-relativistic valley polarization

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-01 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A ferromagnet's proximity effect creates four switchable valley states in an altermagnet without spin-orbit coupling.

desk verdict Plausible DFT route to SOC-free valley polarization in FM/AM heterostructures, but the four-state memory claim needs total-energy evidence. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.22360 v1 pith:IJUES5S2 submitted 2026-07-24 cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Weifeng Xie , Yongqi Chen , Yiboyang Sun , Xiong Xu , Yunliang Yue , Hui Wang This is my paper · ORCID

classification cond-mat.mtrl-sci

keywords valleypolarizationmagneticproximityeffectaltermagnetvanderWaalsheterostructureferromagneticsemiconductorvalleytronicsfirst-principlescalculationNéelvector

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 predicts that stacking a ferromagnetic semiconductor (CrP or CrAs) on a monolayer altermagnet (V2S2O and related compounds) induces valley polarization in the altermagnet purely through magnetic proximity, with no need for spin-orbit coupling. In the representative CrP/V2S2O stack, the lowermost conduction band splits by about 53 meV between the X and Y valleys, and this splitting grows to 537 meV when the interlayer distance is compressed by 0.5 Å. The authors show that flipping the ferromagnet's magnetization and flipping the altermagnet's Néel vector act as two independent controls, producing four distinct valley-polarized states. The paper argues that the effect is generic across several FM/AM heterostructures, making them a candidate platform for valleytronics-based multistate information storage.

What carries the argument

Altermagnet (AM): a collinear magnetic material whose opposite-spin bands are split in momentum space despite zero net magnetization, giving spin-momentum-locked valleys at X and Y without SOC. Magnetic proximity effect: the exchange field leaking from the ferromagnetic layer shifts opposite-spin bands in the AM in opposite directions, lifting valley degeneracy. The two control knobs — FM magnetization direction and AM Néel vector direction — are the binary degrees of freedom that generate the four independent valley-polarized states.

What would settle it

Recalculate the CrP/V2S2O band structure with Ueff on V and Cr varied over a realistic range (e.g., 2–6 eV) and with a higher k-mesh or a hybrid functional; if the X/Y splitting changes sign for any reasonable parameter set, the four independent valley states are an artifact of the correlation parameter rather than a robust magnetic-valley coupling.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the magnetic proximity effect of a tetragonal ferromagnetic semiconductor breaks the X/Y valley degeneracy of an adjacent altermagnet monolayer, producing non-relativistic valley polarization — splitting that does not depend on spin-orbit coupling. Using the CrP/V2S2O heterostructure as a test case, first-principles calculations find a 53.03 meV valley polarization in the altermagnet's lowermost conduction band, with layer-resolved bands showing that the valleys come from the V2S2O layer while CrP provides the exchange field. Reversing the CrP magnetization or the V2S2O Néel vector independently flips or reconfigures the valley polarization, giving four independent

Load-bearing premise

The predicted 53 meV splitting depends on how strongly electron correlations are modeled (the Hubbard U values chosen for V and Cr) and on assuming the most stable stacking; if those values are off, the magnitude and even the pattern of states could change.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Valley polarization in these FM/AM stacks requires no spin-orbit coupling, opening light-element, high-coherence valleytronic materials.
CrP/V2S2O and similar stacks give four distinct valley-polarized states, so one heterostructure can encode two independent bits, promising multistate valleytronic memory.
The valley splitting is tunable by interlayer distance: 0.5 Å compression raises it from 53 to 537 meV, suggesting strain as a control handle.
Because the effect appears in multiple FM/AM combinations (CrAs/V2Se2O, CrAs/Nb2Se2O, CrP/Cr2Te2O) and in a metastable stacking of CrP/V2S2O, it is likely generic rather than a quirk of one interface.
Flipping FM magnetization flips valley polarization, meaning magnetization direction could be read out optically through valley-selective responses, giving a magneto-valley coupling.

Reading between the lines

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

If the non-relativistic splitting survives in real devices, valley lifetime could be longer than in SOC-based TMD systems, since intervalley scattering mediated by spin-orbit coupling is absent; this is an inference, not a claim of the paper.
The two binary knobs could combine with a third control — interlayer compression — to write and amplify states; a strain-controlled device could toggle between the 53 meV and 537 meV regimes.
The paper's universality argument is based on three additional heterostructures; a sharper test would scan a broader family of tetragonal altermagnets and check whether valley polarization always follows the FM magnetization.
The four-state storage concept implicitly requires that the two magnetic orders switch independently; in reality FM/AM interlayer exchange coupling may bias switching, which is not addressed in the paper.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

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

Colleague,

This paper proposes FM/AM van der Waals heterostructures as a SOC-free route to valley polarization. The FM (CrP, CrAs) is a tetragonal ferromagnetic semiconductor; the AM (V2S2O, V2Se2O, Nb2Se2O, Cr2Te2O) has spin-momentum-locked valleys. Magnetic proximity shifts the opposite-spin bands, lifting the X/Y degeneracy. That is the genuinely new piece: proximity from a ferromagnet has been used for TMDs, and altermagnets have been shown to valley-split under strain, but the combination is new and, on the evidence here, physically reasonable.

The paper does several things right. The PbO control is the best part: swapping in a non-magnetic buffer leaves the AM valleys degenerate, which supports the proximity origin. The layer-resolved bands and the SOC check in the SI reinforce the story. The interlayer-distance dependence (compression boosts the polarization to ~537 meV) is a sensible consistency test. The calculations are standard PBE+U with U values taken from the literature; no fitted parameters are driving the result.

Now the soft spots. The four-state memory claim is not supported. The authors show band structures for the four FM/AM magnetic configurations, but no total energies, no interlayer exchange coupling, and no anisotropy barriers. If the interchange coupling is strong, some of those configurations may not be metastable, and 'independent switching' becomes an artifact. For the multistate storage application, this is load-bearing, not cosmetic. The fix is straightforward: total energies for all four states, the interlayer exchange coupling constant, and ideally a magnetic anisotropy estimate.

Second, the 'universal' claim rests on four or five heterostructures. That is suggestive, not universal. Third, the headline 53.03 meV value is a single U point; there is no U variation or k-mesh/cutoff convergence shown, so the quantitative number is fragile. The mechanism doesn't depend on that magnitude, but the paper should say so.

The citation pattern is fine. The self-citation (ref 44) is background, not an input, and ref 45 on the altermagnetic proximity effect is relevant though the comparison is too brief.

My bottom line: the core mechanism is plausible, and the paper would benefit from a serious referee. It needs major revision before the four-state claim is credible, but it is not a reject on the physics alone. I would send it to review.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes van der Waals heterostructures combining tetragonal ferromagnetic semiconductors (CrP, CrAs) with altermagnetic monolayers (V2S2O, V2Se2O, Nb2Se2O, Cr2Te2O), and uses DFT (PBE+U with literature Ueff values) to show that the magnetic proximity effect from the FM lifts the X/Y valley degeneracy of the AM without invoking spin-orbit coupling. The central example, CrP/V2S2O, yields a 53.03 meV non-relativistic valley polarization in the AM conduction bands. The authors argue this is universal, demonstrate that the effect scales with interlayer distance, and claim that flipping the FM magnetization and the AM Néel vector produces four independent valley-polarized states suited for multistage valleytronic storage.

Significance. If the result holds, it identifies a SOC-free route to valley polarization and a potential multistate memory concept, extending recent altermagnet valleytronics proposals. The work has clear strengths: standard DFT methodology with no fitted parameters; a control calculation with non-magnetic PbO that supports the magnetic-proximity origin; a check that SOC does not alter the effect; and demonstration in several material combinations. The main significance depends on whether the four configurations are physically switchable metastable states, which the manuscript does not currently establish.

major comments (3)

[Results and Discussion, Fig. 5; Conclusion] The central applied claim is four independent valley-polarized states for multistage storage. The paper shows band structures for the four FM/AM configurations but reports no total energies, no magnetic anisotropy, and no interlayer exchange coupling. If the FM and AM layers are exchange-coupled, some configurations with reversed FM or reversed Néel order may relax to the ground state; without demonstrating that all four are local minima separated by energy barriers, Fig. 5(e)-(h) may represent constrained states rather than switchable physical states. Please compute total energies for all four configurations, verify metastability relative to the ground state, and estimate switching barriers.
[Computational Methods and Results, Fig. 4(b)] The headline 53.03 meV valley polarization is obtained with fixed PBE+U parameters (Ueff = 4 eV on V, 3 eV on Cr) and a single k-mesh/cutoff. No U sensitivity, k-mesh, or cutoff convergence is reported. Since CrP has a small indirect gap (41.04 meV) and the exchange splitting is U-sensitive, the magnitude and possibly the sign/ordering of the valley polarization could change. Please provide a U-variation study (e.g., Ueff = 2, 4, 6 eV) and a k-mesh/cutoff convergence check to establish robustness of the 53.03 meV value and of the four-state pattern.
[Results and Conclusion, Figs. S4-S6] The word 'universal' is used to describe the phenomenon, but the evidence comprises one detailed system (CrP/V2S2O), three additional heterostructures, and a few stacking variants. This is a narrow basis for universality. Either temper the claim (e.g., 'extends to several FM/AM combinations') or provide a symmetry-based argument and a broader materials screen. As written, the universality claim exceeds the evidence presented.

minor comments (6)

[Abstract/Introduction] Typo: 'spin-orbital coupling' should be 'spin-orbit coupling'. Also the spacing in 'Né el' appears as a non-breaking issue; use 'Néel' consistently.
[Results, lattice parameters] The text states the lattice mismatch between CrP (4.17 Å) and V2S2O (4.03 Å) is approximately 3%; the arithmetic gives about 3.5%. Please check the quoted value.
[Fig. 4(c)-(f)] The color scale or intensity scale for layer-resolved band contributions is not defined in the caption. Add a legend or state the isosurface/weight convention.
[Fig. 5] The four configurations in Fig. 5(a)-(d) are not explicitly labeled in the caption with the FM magnetization direction and the AM Néel vector direction. Defining these symbols would make the four states much clearer.
[Results, interlayer-distance tuning] For the interlayer-distance compression/stretching results (Figs. S8-S9), state explicitly whether the internal atomic positions are re-relaxed at each constrained interlayer distance or held fixed. The reported 537.43 meV under 0.5 Å compression should be labeled as a constrained calculation if no relaxation was performed.
[References] Reference [44] is a self-citation and appears in the context of PbO/V2Se2O behavior; please verify that this reference actually reports the cited result and include the relevant comparison in the main text or SI.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the valley polarization is a parameter-free DFT output, not a fit to its own target.

full rationale

The central claim—non-relativistic valley polarization in the AM induced by magnetic proximity from the FM—comes directly from first-principles PBE+U band-structure calculations. The Hubbard U values are taken from prior external literature (Ueff = 4 eV on V, 3 eV on Cr) and are not fitted to the 53.03 meV valley polarization; that number emerges from the computed band structures. The four valley-polarized states are obtained by explicitly reversing the FM magnetization and the AM Néel vector in the heterostructure, and the resulting valley polarization is an output, not a re-description of an input. The only overlapping-author citation (ref. 44) appears in a supporting consistency statement about PbO/V2Se2O and SnO/V2Se2O heterostructures; the paper's own control calculation with PbO/V2S2O and external refs. 28 and 45 also support the point, so the self-citation is not load-bearing. No equation or construction reduces the predicted quantity to an input definition. Numerical robustness with respect to U, k-mesh, or magnetic-state stability would be separate physical/correctness concerns, not evidence of circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard DFT approximations, Hubbard U parameters taken from prior literature, and the assumed magnetic ground states of CrP and V2S2O. No new particles or forces are introduced. The U values are the main non-standard inputs and are not validated against experiment for this heterostructure.

free parameters (2)

Ueff (V) = 4 eV
Hubbard U correction for V d-electrons, adopted from ref 23; not fitted here but controls the V2S2O band gap and exchange splitting that determine the valley polarization magnitude.
Ueff (Cr) = 3 eV
Hubbard U correction for Cr d-electrons, adopted from refs 34–36; controls CrP exchange splitting and the proximity effect strength.

assumptions (3)

domain assumption DFT with PBE+U and PAW accurately describes the electronic structure of these 2D magnets.
The entire result is a DFT prediction; no experimental verification for the heterostructure is provided. Section: Computational Methods.
domain assumption V2S2O is an altermagnetic semiconductor and CrP is a ferromagnetic semiconductor, as assumed from prior studies and their own monolayer calculations.
Ground-state magnetic classifications underpin the mechanism. Sections: Fig. 3, refs 34-36,43.
domain assumption The magnetic proximity effect is the only cause of valley polarization; the PbO control removes non-magnetic interface effects.
The control is a single non-magnetic insulator; other effects (strain, charge transfer) may still contribute. Section: Results and Discussion.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Magnetic proximity-induced non-relativistic valley polarization." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/IJUES5S2

@misc{pith2026260722360,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Magnetic proximity-induced non-relativistic valley polarization},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/IJUES5S2}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.22360}
}

read the original abstract

The magnetic proximity effect in van der Waals heterostructures exerts a significant impact on the properties of adjacent materials. Here, we propose van der Waals heterostructures composed of monolayers ferromagnets (FM) and altermagnets (AM), in which the magnetic proximity effect from the FM induces pronounced non-relativistic valley polarization in the AM, and this phenomenon is demonstrated to be universal. Furthermore, by tuning the magnetization of the FM and the N\'eel vector direction of the AM, four independent valley-polarized states can be realized in the FM/AM heterostructures, exhibiting strong magnetic-valley coupling. These findings suggest that FM/AM heterostructures hold potential application value in the field of valleytronics-based information storage.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

8 extracted references

[1]

R.; Yu, H.; Clark, G.; Rivera, P.; Ross, J

(1) Schaibley, J. R.; Yu, H.; Clark, G.; Rivera, P.; Ross, J. S.; Seyler, K. L.; Yao, W.; Xu, X. Valleytronics in 2D Materials. Nat Rev Mater 2016, 1 (11), 16055. (2) Li, L.; Shao, L.; Liu, X.; Gao, A.; Wang, H.; Zheng, B.; Hou, G.; Shehzad, K.; Yu, L.; Miao, F.; Shi, Y .; Xu, Y .; Wang, X. Room -Temperature Valleytronic Transistor. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2020...

2016
[2]

Phys. Rev. Lett. 2014, 113 (26), 266804. (8) MacNeill, D.; Heikes, C.; Mak, K. F.; Anderson, Z.; Kormá nyos, A.; Zó lyomi, V .; Park, J.; Ralph, D. C. Breaking of Valley Degeneracy by Magnetic Field in Monolayer MoSe

2014
[3]

Phys. Rev. Lett. 2015, 114 (3), 037401. (9) Aivazian, G.; Gong, Z.; Jones, A. M.; Chu, R. -L.; Yan, J.; Mandrus, D. G.; Zhang, C.; Cobden, D.; Yao, W.; Xu, X. Magnetic Control of Valley Pseudospin in Monolayer WSe2. Nature Phys 2015, 11 (2), 148–152. (10) Mak, K. F.; He, K.; Shan, J.; Heinz, T. F. Control of Valley Polarization in Monolayer MoS2 by Optica...

2015
[2026]

Efficiency of Ab-Initio Total Energy Calculations for Metals and Semiconductors Using a Plane -Wave Basis Set

(30) Kresse, G.; Furthmü ller, J. Efficiency of Ab-Initio Total Energy Calculations for Metals and Semiconductors Using a Plane -Wave Basis Set. Comput. Mater. Sci. 1996, 6 (1), 15–50. (31) Blö chl, P. E. Projector Augmented-Wave Method. Phys. Rev. B 1994, 50 (24), 17953–17979. (32) Perdew, J. P.; Burke, K.; Ernzerhof, M. Generalized Gradient Approximatio...

1996
[2846]

Multipiezo Effect in Altermagnetic V 2 SeTeO Monolayer

(23) Zhu, Y .; Chen, T.; Li, Y .; Qiao, L.; Ma, X.; Liu, C.; Hu, T.; Gao, H.; Ren, W. Multipiezo Effect in Altermagnetic V 2 SeTeO Monolayer. Nano Lett. 2024, 24 (1), 472–478. (24) Wu, Y .; Deng, L.; Yin, X.; Tong, J.; Tian, F.; Zhang, X. Valley -Related Multipiezo Effect and Noncollinear Spin Current in an Altermagnet Fe 2 Se2 O Monolayer. Nano Lett. 202...

2024
[4163]

Controlling the Subpicosecond Coherent Spin and Valley Dynamics with Anomalous Magnetic Proximity Effect

(42) Hu, Q.; Tan, Y .; Cui, Q.; Huang, Y .; Zhu, W.; Zhang, X.; Wang, Y .; Wang, Y .; Qian, X.; Zhang, J.; Wei, Z.; You, J.; Ji, Y .; Zhao, L.; Xiong, Q.; Wang, K. Controlling the Subpicosecond Coherent Spin and Valley Dynamics with Anomalous Magnetic Proximity Effect. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2026, 136 (23), 236701. (43) Li, J. -Y .; Fan, A. -D.; Wang, Y .-K.; Z...

2026
[5129]

L.; Linpeng, X.; Wilson, N

(15) Zhong, D.; Seyler, K. L.; Linpeng, X.; Wilson, N. P.; Taniguchi, T.; Watanabe, K.; McGuire, M. A.; Fu, K. -M. C.; Xiao, D.; Yao, W.; Xu, X. Layer -Resolved Magnetic Proximity Effect in van Der Waals Heterostructures. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2020, 15 (3), 187–191. (16) Abdollahi, M.; Tagani, M. B. Tuning the Magnetic Properties of a VSe 2 Monolayer via the ...

2020
[8963]

Valley Polarization in Janus Single-Layer MoSSe via Magnetic Doping

(12) Peng, R.; Ma, Y .; Zhang, S.; Huang, B.; Dai, Y . Valley Polarization in Janus Single-Layer MoSSe via Magnetic Doping. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 2018, 9 (13), 3612–3617. (13) Zhou, J.; Lin, J.; Sims, H.; Jiang, C.; Cong, C.; Brehm, J. A.; Zhang, Z.; Niu, L.; Chen, Y .; Zhou, Y .; Wang, Y .; Liu, F.; Zhu, C.; Y u, T.; Suenaga, K.; Mishra, R.; Pantelides, S...

2018

Pith tools

Reviewed August 1, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

R.; Yu, H.; Clark, G.; Rivera, P.; Ross, J

(1) Schaibley, J. R.; Yu, H.; Clark, G.; Rivera, P.; Ross, J. S.; Seyler, K. L.; Yao, W.; Xu, X. Valleytronics in 2D Materials. Nat Rev Mater 2016, 1 (11), 16055. (2) Li, L.; Shao, L.; Liu, X.; Gao, A.; Wang, H.; Zheng, B.; Hou, G.; Shehzad, K.; Yu, L.; Miao, F.; Shi, Y .; Xu, Y .; Wang, X. Room -Temperature Valleytronic Transistor. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2020...

2016

[2] [2]

Phys. Rev. Lett. 2014, 113 (26), 266804. (8) MacNeill, D.; Heikes, C.; Mak, K. F.; Anderson, Z.; Kormá nyos, A.; Zó lyomi, V .; Park, J.; Ralph, D. C. Breaking of Valley Degeneracy by Magnetic Field in Monolayer MoSe

2014

[3] [3]

Phys. Rev. Lett. 2015, 114 (3), 037401. (9) Aivazian, G.; Gong, Z.; Jones, A. M.; Chu, R. -L.; Yan, J.; Mandrus, D. G.; Zhang, C.; Cobden, D.; Yao, W.; Xu, X. Magnetic Control of Valley Pseudospin in Monolayer WSe2. Nature Phys 2015, 11 (2), 148–152. (10) Mak, K. F.; He, K.; Shan, J.; Heinz, T. F. Control of Valley Polarization in Monolayer MoS2 by Optica...

2015

[4] [2026]

Efficiency of Ab-Initio Total Energy Calculations for Metals and Semiconductors Using a Plane -Wave Basis Set

(30) Kresse, G.; Furthmü ller, J. Efficiency of Ab-Initio Total Energy Calculations for Metals and Semiconductors Using a Plane -Wave Basis Set. Comput. Mater. Sci. 1996, 6 (1), 15–50. (31) Blö chl, P. E. Projector Augmented-Wave Method. Phys. Rev. B 1994, 50 (24), 17953–17979. (32) Perdew, J. P.; Burke, K.; Ernzerhof, M. Generalized Gradient Approximatio...

1996

[5] [2846]

Multipiezo Effect in Altermagnetic V 2 SeTeO Monolayer

(23) Zhu, Y .; Chen, T.; Li, Y .; Qiao, L.; Ma, X.; Liu, C.; Hu, T.; Gao, H.; Ren, W. Multipiezo Effect in Altermagnetic V 2 SeTeO Monolayer. Nano Lett. 2024, 24 (1), 472–478. (24) Wu, Y .; Deng, L.; Yin, X.; Tong, J.; Tian, F.; Zhang, X. Valley -Related Multipiezo Effect and Noncollinear Spin Current in an Altermagnet Fe 2 Se2 O Monolayer. Nano Lett. 202...

2024

[6] [4163]

Controlling the Subpicosecond Coherent Spin and Valley Dynamics with Anomalous Magnetic Proximity Effect

(42) Hu, Q.; Tan, Y .; Cui, Q.; Huang, Y .; Zhu, W.; Zhang, X.; Wang, Y .; Wang, Y .; Qian, X.; Zhang, J.; Wei, Z.; You, J.; Ji, Y .; Zhao, L.; Xiong, Q.; Wang, K. Controlling the Subpicosecond Coherent Spin and Valley Dynamics with Anomalous Magnetic Proximity Effect. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2026, 136 (23), 236701. (43) Li, J. -Y .; Fan, A. -D.; Wang, Y .-K.; Z...

2026

[7] [5129]

L.; Linpeng, X.; Wilson, N

(15) Zhong, D.; Seyler, K. L.; Linpeng, X.; Wilson, N. P.; Taniguchi, T.; Watanabe, K.; McGuire, M. A.; Fu, K. -M. C.; Xiao, D.; Yao, W.; Xu, X. Layer -Resolved Magnetic Proximity Effect in van Der Waals Heterostructures. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2020, 15 (3), 187–191. (16) Abdollahi, M.; Tagani, M. B. Tuning the Magnetic Properties of a VSe 2 Monolayer via the ...

2020

[8] [8963]

Valley Polarization in Janus Single-Layer MoSSe via Magnetic Doping

(12) Peng, R.; Ma, Y .; Zhang, S.; Huang, B.; Dai, Y . Valley Polarization in Janus Single-Layer MoSSe via Magnetic Doping. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 2018, 9 (13), 3612–3617. (13) Zhou, J.; Lin, J.; Sims, H.; Jiang, C.; Cong, C.; Brehm, J. A.; Zhang, Z.; Niu, L.; Chen, Y .; Zhou, Y .; Wang, Y .; Liu, F.; Zhu, C.; Y u, T.; Suenaga, K.; Mishra, R.; Pantelides, S...

2018