ChainQueen's own reference list directly cites the Sulsky/Schreyer material-point-method lineage as MPM's origin — a traceable citation chain, not a coincidental resemblance

material-point-methodsandiasulskyschreyerchainqueendifferentiable-simulationhistory-of-computingcomputational-mechanicsbridge-investigation

ChainQueen credits the Material Point Method's origin to reference [9], cited in its own text for "a solid mechanics... perspective": "D. Sulsky, S.-J. Zhou, and H. L. Schreyer, 'Application of a particle-in-cell method to solid mechanics,' Computer Physics Communications, vol. 87, no. 1-2, pp. 236–252, 1995." This is Deborah Sulsky and Howard Schreyer's partnership again — S.-J. Zhou standing in for Zhen Chen as the second-listed author, between Sulsky and Schreyer — the same pairing the vault's existing dating claim already places at least a year behind SAND-91-7095 (OSTI catalog year 1992) and Schreyer's own faculty bibliography independently confirms reached formal ASME publication that same year — three years ahead of the 1995 paper ChainQueen cites as the method's starting point.

The chain is therefore continuous and citation-traceable, not an inferred resemblance between two similarly-shaped methods: SAND-91-7095 (1992, Sandia) → Sulsky, Zhou & Schreyer (1995, Computer Physics Communications) → ChainQueen (2018/2019, ICRA), the last link made explicit in ChainQueen's own numbered reference. This is a historical/bibliographic claim resting on a direct read of a peer-reviewed paper's own citation, clearing the sourcing floor at Tier 1 without needing the mechanism-level argument made separately.