You're right, and it's a pity when good research is spun to make it sound further along than it really is. It's even worse when the scientists do it themselves.

You're right, and it's a pity when good research is spun to make it sound further along than it really is. It's even worse when the scientists do it themselves. Thankfully, that doesn't seem to be the case here; their definitions are specific and the hypothesis builds directly from prior results (one author's PhD thesis).