states. Specifically, we set $\initial{\pressurestrain}=0$, consider three values of $\initial{\shearstrain}$, namely, 2, 2.2 and 2.4 (denoted in the following figures by blue, red and green markers, respectively), and for each value of $\initial{\shearstrain}$ we carry out calculations considering 6 combinations of $\amp{\pressurestrain},\ \amp{\shearstrain}$ and $w$, chosen from the ranges

$$-0.8<\amp{\pressurestrain}<0.8,\ \ \ 0.1<\amp{\shearstrain}<0.7,\ \ \ 0.07\,\mathrm{m}<w<0.08\,\mathrm{m}.$$

These combinations were selected by trial and error to yield a single vector solitary wave—either quasi-shear or quasi-pressure. By contrast, the initial conditions used by @ziv2019b delivered trains of solitary waves. The combinations for quasi-pressure solitary waves are ordered such that when we increase $\amp{\shearstrain}$, we also increase $\amp{\pressurestrain}$, where $\amp{\pressurestrain}$ is always positive. Conversely, the combinations for quasi-shear solitary waves are ordered such that when we increase $\amp{\shearstrain}$, we also decrease $\amp{\pressurestrain}$, where $\amp{\pressurestrain}$ is always negative. In both cases, the value of $w$ is decreased when $\amp{\shearstrain}$ is increased.

Our results for quasi-pressure solitary waves are shown in Fig.$\ $\[fig:Characterization\](a), in the following manner. From each simulation we extract the maximal state of strain over the time that it takes the generated wave to cross a unit cell. We specifically extract the maximal strain state at the middle of phases $a$ and 