---
# System prepended metadata

title: Meeting Notes - 14.10.2022

---

# Meeting Notes - 14.10.2022

**Participants**:
- [x] Casper Welzel Andersen
- [x] Rickard Armiento
- [ ] Francesca Lønstad Bleken
- [ ] Matthias Büschelberger
- [ ] Stuart Chalk
- [ ] Kathrin Frei
- [x] Jesper Friis (after ~1 h)
- [x] Emanuele Ghedini
- [ ] Luca Ghiringhelli
- [ ] Gerhard Goldbeck
- [ ] Saulius Grazulis
- [x] James Hester
- [ ] Antanas Vaitkus
- [ ] Nathan Daelman
- [x] Francesco Antonio Zaccarini

## New concept addition templates

James has pushed onwards with the homework template presented previously by Emanuele on how to think about adding new ontological concepts.
James' idea is to create a GitHub issue's template that matches the template by Emanuele. An excellent idea.
To follow up on this, the team members are encouraged to continue this work on GitHub: [emmo-repo/domain-crystallography#4](https://github.com/emmo-repo/domain-crystallography/issues/4).

## Ontological compromization

Rickard: From a talk by Giovanni Pizzi, it was mentioned that an experiment _can_ affect and change the sample, leading to it effectively being a _different_ sample used for subsequent experiments.

The ontological issues could be "solved" by claiming the semantical individuals are models of the sample, not representing the sample itself.

"model" is a bad/confusing word to describe anything ontologically in general.

---

Disjoint PeriodicCrystal and APeriodicCrystal?
A long discussion ensued, where Emanuele presented several different representations the `Crystal` concept children `PeriodicCrystal` and `APeriodicCrystal` could take.

Eventually, we have reached the agreement that:

- They should **not** be disjoint concepts.
- The ontology offers an analysis/interpretation-oriented knowledge base, which puts the main semantics in the semiotic branch, i.e., "what properties do the analysis show a sample to have within some uncertainty".
- This means a `sample` individual, representing a sample in the same space and time dimension interval, can be classified as being both `PeriodicCrystal` and `APeriodicCrystal`, through the effect of two different analyses/interprations of the _same_ experiment coming to different conclusions about the `Periodicity` concept (which is itself a `Property` concept).
- That a sample is not necessarily both periodic and aperiodic at the same time **but** has never-the-less been _interpreted_ to be both at the same time.
