Worthy meeting yesterday

I had a great time with a very important person who had been in a top of the AI and VR field, the time interval lasted as long as 6 hours.
He had the experience to work with some researchers in National Universities and he show the articles about that prior to our meeting.
Checking the articles, the contents was not so movable as I desired.  The direction of the research is not clear, but abstract just to prove that they did something new with collaborations.
Official terminology, Orthopantomograph should be invited in the article, this is a common sense, but Panoramic Radiograph was used that is commonly used among the ordinary general practitioners. They are not a GP but a researcher, no?
They should feel some shame to have used such a unsuitable word in the article that would retain in future.
I'm afraid to say that the method of Orthopantomography lacks the accuracy because of the basic concept of Tomography producing mm order distorted discrepancy, so the method is not appropriate  to be used as a reliable reference.
Also, no further following experimental research is shown  by them since the first publication in 2010, just a single shot one. They just wanted to be a pioneer of the collaboration?
Any research that has no purpose with no clear direction to go easily looses speed and stalls finally.
The purpose to meet with him yesterday is not to obtain some selfish reputation for myself, but to contribute myself to their professional " Facial Recognition System" showing some technique to change the Face.
There exists some discrepancy of recognition each other even after 6 hours lasted meeting. The continuation would be done if there is a future opportunity.