Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 25 references

Magnetohydrodynamic drag on an oscillating sphere in a rotating spherical cavity

T0 review · 2 major / 0 minor · reviewed 2026-07-12 · grok-4.5

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

Pith's one-line read A single asymptotic theory now gives the oscillatory drag on a conducting sphere inside a rotating spherical cavity, including confinement, viscosity, rotation and magnetic fields at once.

desk verdict The abstract promises a useful unification of confined rotating MHD oscillatory drag, but the supplied full text is a completely different paper, so the claim cannot be checked and the work is unassessable as submitted. read the letter →

arxiv 2604.10594 v2 pith:UWZE5O2G submitted 2026-04-12 physics.flu-dyn physics.geo-ph

David Cébron , Paolo Personnettaz This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.flu-dynphysics.geo-ph PACS 47.65.-d47.32.Ef91.25.Za
keywords magnetohydrodynamicsoscillatorydragrotatingsphericalshellSlichtermodesStokes–EkmanlayersaddedmassAlfvénwavesconfinedflow
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

Classical theories of the drag on an oscillating sphere each treat only part of the problem: viscosity in a bounded fluid, rotation without viscosity, or magnetic coupling through thin boundary layers. This paper builds one asymptotic framework that keeps all of those effects together for a conducting sphere translating inside a rotating spherical shell, with arbitrary gap size and arbitrary conductivity and permeability contrasts among the inner sphere, fluid and outer wall. The result is closed-form expressions for added mass, viscous drag, electromagnetic drag and the associated dissipation, valid for both polar and equatorial oscillations. Those expressions recover the classical Stokes, Ekman and Buffett–Goertz limits and match direct numerical simulations over a wide parameter range. The practical payoff is quantitative coupling and dissipation rates for Earth’s inner-core Slichter modes, icy-moon oceans and liquid-metal laboratory setups.

What carries the argument

A matched asymptotic expansion of the linearised oscillatory MHD equations in a rotating spherical shell that yields explicit drag and dissipation formulae for both boundary-layer and diffusion-dominated bulk regimes, with arbitrary conductivity and permeability jumps.

What would settle it

A direct numerical simulation (or liquid-metal experiment) of an oscillating conducting sphere in a rotating spherical shell whose measured force and dissipation fall systematically outside the analytical drag formulae outside the boundary-layer or diffusion limits would falsify the claimed unification.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

There exists a unified asymptotic description of the force on a conducting sphere that oscillates translationally inside a rotating, electrically conducting spherical cavity. The description supplies added mass, viscous and electromagnetic drag, and dissipation for arbitrary confinement and arbitrary electrical and magnetic contrasts among the three regions, for both polar and equatorial motion. It captures viscous pressure corrections, magnetic pressure and tension, Alfvén-wave radiation and magnetohydrodynamic Stokes–Ekman layers, reduces to the classical boundary-layer theories as special cases, and includes new closed-form solutions for diffusion-dominated confined Stokes flow and a conf

Load-bearing premise

The small-amplitude, linearised asymptotic reductions (boundary-layer and diffusion-dominated bulk regimes) remain uniformly valid across the claimed broad parameter range and for the planetary and laboratory applications named.

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.

Referee Report

2 major / 0 minor

Summary. The abstract of arXiv:2604.10594 claims a unified asymptotic theory for the oscillatory drag (added mass, viscous and electromagnetic contributions, and dissipation) on a conducting sphere translating inside a rotating spherical cavity, for arbitrary confinement and arbitrary conductivity/permeability contrasts, covering both polar and equatorial motions and recovering classical Stokes, Busse and Buffett–Goertz limits, with DNS validation over a broad parameter range. The supplied full-text body, however, is not that manuscript: it is the complete text of a different paper (arXiv:2604.10592) on post-cut metadata inference attacks against quantum circuit-cutting pipelines. No MHD equations, asymptotic expansions, boundary-layer constructions, closed-form Stokes solutions, or DNS comparisons for the claimed drag framework are present.

Significance. If the abstract’s claims were substantiated by a correct manuscript, the result would be significant for planetary-core and liquid-metal applications: a single framework spanning confinement, rotation, viscosity and magnetic coupling for Slichter-type modes would fill a genuine gap left by separate classical treatments. That significance cannot be assessed here because the load-bearing derivations and numerical checks are absent from the supplied text.

major comments (2)
  1. The full manuscript body attached under paper_id 2604.10594 is the quantum circuit-cutting metadata paper (title, abstract, sections I–XI, tables, figures and references of arXiv:2604.10592). None of the MHD drag analysis, asymptotic orderings, boundary conditions, closed-form Stokes solution, confined inductionless extension, or DNS validation claimed in the MHD abstract appears. The central scientific claim is therefore unassessable from the materials provided.
  2. Because the modelling premises (small-amplitude linearised MHD, boundary-layer versus diffusion-dominated bulk regimes, matched asymptotics, and the parameter range of the DNS) are not present, the weakest modelling assumption identified by the reader—uniform validity of those reductions across the claimed broad range and for the named planetary/lab applications—cannot be checked or stress-tested.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the supplied manuscript is an empirical ML side-channel evaluation with independent labels, hold-out protocols and controls; nothing reduces by construction to its inputs.

full rationale

The full text provided is the quantum circuit-cutting metadata paper (arXiv:2604.10592), not the MHD drag paper named in the header. Within that text the derivation chain is: (1) formalise a semi-honest transcript of compiled fragment width/depth/2Q-count, (2) generate a labelled corpus whose labels are assigned from logical circuit properties before compilation, (3) train standard classifiers offline, (4) evaluate under instance-disjoint and size-holdout splits plus a matched-footprint control and channel ablations, (5) confirm the routing-tax mechanism on real 156-qubit hardware. None of these steps is self-definitional, none renames a fitted parameter as a prediction, and no uniqueness theorem or ansatz is imported via self-citation. Performance numbers are ordinary supervised-learning metrics on held-out data; the matched-footprint and structure-only ablations explicitly test against trivial scale artefacts. Consequently the central claim (metadata leakage exists and is structure-dominated) does not reduce to its own inputs. Score 0 is therefore required.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review of a theoretical MHD paper. Load-bearing content is almost entirely unstated asymptotic and continuum assumptions standard to linear oscillatory MHD in spherical shells, plus the claim that DNS confirms the analytics. No free parameters or invented entities are named in the abstract; none can be audited from equations.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Linearised small-amplitude oscillatory incompressible MHD (or hydrodynamic) equations in a rotating frame are an adequate model for the drag of interest.
    Implied by classical Stokes/Ekman/Buffett–Goertz lineage and by ‘oscillatory drag’ asymptotics; not stated with amplitude bounds in the abstract.
  • domain assumption Matched asymptotic expansions in boundary-layer and diffusion-dominated bulk regimes capture the leading drag, added mass and dissipation for the intended parameter ranges.
    Central methodological premise of the ‘unified asymptotic framework’; validity range not given in the abstract.
  • domain assumption Material contrasts (electrical conductivity and magnetic permeability of inner sphere, fluid and outer solid) enter only through the linear interface conditions used in the asymptotics.
    Required for the claim of arbitrary contrasts; standard in linear MHD but not detailed here.
  • ad hoc to paper Direct numerical simulations of the same linearised (or weakly nonlinear) problem validate the analytics across a broad parameter range.
    Empirical support claimed in the abstract; setup, resolution and error measures unavailable.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Magnetohydrodynamic drag on an oscillating sphere in a rotating spherical cavity." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/UWZE5O2G

@misc{pith2026260410594,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Magnetohydrodynamic drag on an oscillating sphere in a rotating spherical cavity},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/UWZE5O2G}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2604.10594}
}
read the original abstract

The drag on an oscillating sphere is a classical fluid-mechanics problem, yet no existing theory simultaneously accounts for confinement, rotation, viscosity and magnetic fields. We consider a conducting sphere undergoing translational oscillations inside a rotating spherical cavity, modelling confined magnetohydrodynamic flows relevant to planetary interiors and liquid metal experiments. In planetary settings, these motions correspond to the polar and equatorial Slichter modes of Earth's inner core. Existing theories are restricted to separate asymptotic regimes, including viscous drag in bounded fluids (Stokes 1851), rotational effects in inviscid cavities (Busse 1974), and magnetic coupling through oscillatory boundary layers (Buffett and Goertz 1995). We derive a unified asymptotic framework for oscillatory drag in rotating spherical shells with arbitrary confinement and arbitrary electrical conductivity and magnetic permeability contrasts between the inner sphere, fluid shell and outer solid, applicable to both polar and equatorial oscillations. The theory yields expressions for added mass, viscous and electromagnetic drag, with the associated dissipation. It captures viscous pressure corrections, magnetic pressure and tension, Alfven-wave radiation, and magnetohydrodynamic Stokes-Ekman boundary layers. Classical boundary-layer theories (e.g. Ekman layers) emerge as limiting cases, while confined solutions are also derived for the diffusion-dominated bulk regimes, yielding an explicit closed-form solution for the bounded oscillatory Stokes flow and a confined extension of the inductionless theory. Direct numerical simulations validate the analytical predictions across a broad parameter range. The resulting analytical framework provides quantitative predictions of oscillatory coupling, added mass and dissipation in planetary cores, icy-moon oceans and liquid-metal experiments.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.10594 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. (a) Inner-to-outer radii ratio 𝑎 and frequency ratio 𝛾. (b) Normalised magnetic skin depth and oscillatory Lundquist number. Periods from 1Rosat (2011), 2Grinfeld & Wisdom (2005) and 3Coyette & Hoolst (2014). Conductivities 𝜎 = 0.2-20 S m−1 for subsurface oceans (Psarakis et al. 2024), and 𝜎 = 4 × 105 S m−1 for liquid cores (Cebron ´ et al. 2012b). In (a) and (b), horizontal lines mark emission of inertial (𝛾 > 1) a… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Three-domain configuration and associated viscous and magnetic skin [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Hierarchy and spatial distribution of velocity and magnetic base fields and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (18 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Theoretical basic flow (T) vs. xshells numerical flow (N, dotted, black for 𝛾 = 0, and cyan for the polar mode at 𝛾 = 1/3) for polar (a) and prograde equatorial (b) forcing (𝜃 = 60◦ , 𝑎 = 0.7, 𝐿𝜈 = 6 · 10−3 ). Potential flow: unbounded (orange) and bounded (red) cases …
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Added-mass coefficient 𝐶𝑎 at the inner (a) and outer (b) boundaries vs. 𝛾 for two radius ratios, using no-slip (NS) and stress-free (SF) conditions at 𝑟 = 𝑎𝑠 (stress-free outer boundary) for the comsol simulations. Parameters: (𝐿𝜈/(𝑎𝑚 √ 𝛾))2 = 10−5 and 𝜖 = 0.5𝐿𝜈. Solid…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Theoretical (T) basic flow vs. xshells simulations (N, black) for strong rotation (𝛾 = 0.92): 𝑎 = 0.35 (left) and 𝑎 = 0.05 (right), polar mode (𝜃 = 45◦ , 𝐿𝜈 = 0.002). Potential flow: unbounded case (yellow solid, eq. 4.2 with 𝑎 = 0), bounded case at 𝛾 = 0 (red solid, e…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Radial part of the magnetic perturbation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Tangential components of Δ𝑽 = 𝑽𝜖 −1 − Re(𝑼1 exp (i(𝜔𝑡 + 𝑚𝜙))), which is the flow perturbation near inner (left) and outer (right) boundaries: xshells simulations (orange dotted), inviscid MHD (dark red dashed), inviscid MHD diffusionless (azure dash-dotted), viscomagne…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Tangential magnetic field perturbation near inner (left) and outer (right) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Radial flow perturbation Δ𝑉𝑟 near the inner (left) and outer (right) boundaries: xshells simulations (orange dotted), inviscid MHD (dark red dashed), inviscid MHD diffusionless (azure dash-dotted), viscomagnetic oscillatory (dark green), and purely viscous (violet das…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Role of the electromagnetic properties ˘𝜂 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Ohmic detuning for (a) fluid region : see equation ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p030_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Tangential flow perturbations 𝑢 𝜃 and 𝑢𝜙 near the inner and outer boundaries for (a) polar mode and (b) equatorial mode. xshells simulations (orange dotted), inviscid MHD (dark red dashed), inviscid MHD diffusionless (azure dash-dotted), viscomagnetic oscillatory (dar…
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Tangential components of the magnetic perturbation near the inner and outer [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p034_14.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: (a) Normalised magnetic-stress detuning assuming ˘𝜂 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p036_15.png]
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Azimuthal velocity (a) and magnetic (b) perturbations close the inner (left) and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p038_16.png]
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Meridional (left) and azimuthal (right) velocity (a) and magnetic (b) field [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p040_17.png]
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: Meridional Δ𝑉𝜃 (top) and radial Δ𝑉𝑟 (bottom) velocity perturbation profiles at 𝜃 = 30◦ , 𝜙 = 0. Numerical xshells solution (orange dotted), Stokes solution (black), viscous boundary layer equation (C 1) (violet dashed) , viscous boundary layer and inner secondary bulk…
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: Time evolution of the (a) harmonic displacement and its two first time [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p046_19.png]
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: Comparison of approximations of the added mass coefficient (left) and viscous [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p047_20.png]
Figure 21
Figure 21. Figure 21: (a) Rotation effect on the axial force from tangential viscous stress for the polar [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p048_21.png]

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

25 extracted references · 5 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Simulating large quantum circuits on a small quantum computer,

    T. Peng, A. W. Harrow, M. Ozols, and X. Wu, “Simulating large quantum circuits on a small quantum computer,”Physical Review Letters, vol. 125, no. 15, Oct. 2020. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.125.150504

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.125.150504 2020

  2. [2]

    Cutqc: using small quantum computers for large quantum circuit evaluations,

    W. Tang, T. Tomesh, M. Suchara, J. Larson, and M. Martonosi, “Cutqc: using small quantum computers for large quantum circuit evaluations,” inProceedings of the 26th ACM International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems, ser. ASPLOS ’21. ACM, Apr. 2021, p. 473–486. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.11...

    doi:10.1145/3445814.3446758 2021

  3. [3]

    Fast quantum circuit cutting with randomized measurements,

    A. Lowe, M. Medvidovi ´c, A. Hayes, L. J. Oapos;Riordan, T. R. Bromley, J. M. Arrazola, and N. Killoran, “Fast quantum circuit cutting with randomized measurements,”Quantum, vol. 7, p. 934, Mar. 2023. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.22331/q-2023-03-02-934

    doi:10.22331/q-2023-03-02-934 2023

  4. [4]

    Circuit knitting with classical communication,

    C. Piveteau and D. Sutter, “Circuit knitting with classical communication,”IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 70, no. 4, p. 2734–2745, Apr. 2024. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TIT.2023.3310797

    doi:10.1109/tit.2023.3310797 2024

  5. [5]

    Cutting circuits with multiple two-qubit unitaries,

    L. Schmitt, C. Piveteau, and D. Sutter, “Cutting circuits with multiple two-qubit unitaries,”Quantum, vol. 9, p. 1634, Feb. 2025. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.22331/q-2025-02-18-1634

    doi:10.22331/q-2025-02-18-1634 2025

  6. [6]

    Quantum circuit cutting for classical shadows,

    D. T. S. Chen, Z. H. Saleem, and M. A. Perlin, “Quantum circuit cutting for classical shadows,” vol. 5, no. 2, Jun. 2024. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/3665335

    doi:10.1145/3665335 2024

  7. [7]

    Quantum leak: Timing side-channel attacks on cloud-based quantum services,

    C. Lu, E. Telang, A. Aysu, and K. Basu, “Quantum leak: Timing side-channel attacks on cloud-based quantum services,” 2024. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2401.01521

    arXiv 2024

  8. [8]

    Quantum circuit reconstruction from power side-channel attacks on quantum computer controllers,

    F. Erata, C. Xu, R. Piskac, and J. Szefer, “Quantum circuit reconstruction from power side-channel attacks on quantum computer controllers,”IACR Transactions on Cryptographic Hardware and Embedded Systems, vol. 2024, no. 2, p. 735–768, Mar. 2024. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.46586/tches.v2024.i2.735-768

    doi:10.46586/tches.v2024.i2.735-768 2024

Show all 25 references
  1. [9]

    Exploration of quantum computer power side-channels,

    C. Xu, F. Erata, and J. Szefer, “Exploration of quantum computer power side-channels,” 2023. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/ 2304.03315

    2023 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Reconstructing quantum circuits through side- channel information on cloud-based superconducting quantum comput- ers,

    B. Bell and A. Tr ¨ugler, “Reconstructing quantum circuits through side- channel information on cloud-based superconducting quantum comput- ers,” in2022 IEEE International Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE), 2022, pp. 259–264

    2022

  3. [11]

    Crosstalk-induced side channel threats in multi-tenant nisq computers,

    N. Choudhury, C. N. Mude, S. Das, P. C. Tikkireddi, S. Tannu, and K. Basu, “Crosstalk-induced side channel threats in multi-tenant nisq computers,” 2024. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.10507

    2024 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Analysis of crosstalk in nisq devices and security implications in multi-programming regime,

    A. Ash-Saki, M. Alam, and S. Ghosh, “Analysis of crosstalk in nisq devices and security implications in multi-programming regime,” inProceedings of the ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Low Power Electronics and Design, ser. ISLPED ’20. New York, NY , USA: Association for Co...

    2020 doi

  5. [13]

    Swap attack: Stealthy side-channel attack on multi-tenant quantum cloud system,

    W. J. B. Lee, S. Wang, S. Dutta, W. E. Maouaki, and A. Chattopadhyay, “Swap attack: Stealthy side-channel attack on multi-tenant quantum cloud system,” 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2502. 10115

    2025

  6. [14]

    Universal blind quantum computation,

    A. Broadbent, J. Fitzsimons, and E. Kashefi, “Universal blind quantum computation,” in2009 50th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science. IEEE, Oct. 2009, p. 517–526. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/FOCS.2009.36

    2009 doi

  7. [15]

    Unconditionally verifiable blind quantum computation,

    J. F. Fitzsimons and E. Kashefi, “Unconditionally verifiable blind quantum computation,”Physical Review A, vol. 96, no. 1, Jul. 2017. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.96.012303

    2017 doi

  8. [16]

    Demonstration of blind quantum computing,

    S. Barz, E. Kashefi, A. Broadbent, J. F. Fitzsimons, A. Zeilinger, and P. Walther, “Demonstration of blind quantum computing,”Science, vol. 335, no. 6066, p. 303–308, Jan. 2012. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1214707

    2012 doi

  9. [17]

    Dulek, C

    Y . Dulek, C. Schaffner, and F. Speelman,Theory of Computing, vol. 14, no. 1, p. 1–45, 2018. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.4086/toc. 2018.v014a007

    2018 doi

  10. [18]

    Classical verification of quantum computations,

    U. Mahadev, “Classical verification of quantum computations,” 2023. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/1804.01082

    2023 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Verifiable measurement-only blind quantum computing with stabilizer testing,

    M. Hayashi and T. Morimae, “Verifiable measurement-only blind quantum computing with stabilizer testing,”Physical Review Letters, vol. 115, no. 22, Nov. 2015. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevLett.115.220502

    2015

  12. [20]

    Leveraging quantum circuit cutting for obfuscation and intellectual property protection,

    G. Typaldos, W. Tang, and J. Szefer, “Leveraging quantum circuit cutting for obfuscation and intellectual property protection,” in2024 IEEE International Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE), vol. 01, 2024, pp. 1824–1834

    2024

  13. [21]

    Quantum circuit cutting: A security methodology,

    G. Typaldos, T. Trochatos, and J. Szefer, “Quantum circuit cutting: A security methodology,” in2025 IEEE International Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE), vol. 01, 2025, pp. 417– 427

    2025

  14. [22]

    Evaluating security properties in the execution of quantum circuits,

    P. Bernardi, A. Brogi, G.-L. Ferrari, and G. Bisicchia, “Evaluating security properties in the execution of quantum circuits,” 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.03306

    2025

  15. [23]

    Qasmbench: A low-level qasm benchmark suite for nisq evaluation and simulation,

    A. Li, S. Stein, S. Krishnamoorthy, and J. Ang, “Qasmbench: A low-level qasm benchmark suite for nisq evaluation and simulation,”

  16. [24]

    Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2005.13018

    [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2005.13018

    2005 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Mqt bench: Benchmarking software and design automation tools for quantum computing,

    N. Quetschlich, L. Burgholzer, and R. Wille, “Mqt bench: Benchmarking software and design automation tools for quantum computing,” Quantum, vol. 7, p. 1062, Jul. 2023. [Online]. Available: http: //dx.doi.org/10.22331/q-2023-07-20-1062 APPENDIX The A2 sub-family discrimination ...

    2023 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed July 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.