well the contact/inert subtype system operates on the premise of accented perception suppressing its opposite form, so Ne IEE subtype is less attentive to sensing aspects and more attentive to thinking aspects, whereas the Fi type would be the opposite. the conclusions they draw is that you actually want differing (creative/base) subtypes, so as to maximize information transfer, so the increased bandwidth is made use of. in other words, Ne subtype IEE wants to be with Te subtype SLI since they both will have increased bandwidth across thinking and intuitive channels.

I prefer gulenkos DCNH system but from my experience Meged and Ocharav are right, you see this a lot in academia where Te SLI is more common and they really want to discuss intellectual topics and want Ne and neither party needs a crazy amount of Fi or sensing etc, although of course its still there, they're just relatively attenuated, they're both "nerds" so to speak

possibly It depends on what subtype system, but chae is wrong about emphasizing the same subtype across board (2x creative or 2x base, etc) (Gulenko's subtype complimentariness revolves around group roles people take, which is a different take on things, which may actually come out to same (2x creative/base) subtypes being more complimentary, but its more about DCNH roles that any consistent crossover to creative/base subtyping systems)