Taxonomy for Engineered Living Materials

This project is a theoretical framework and classification system rather than a software product. Its 'defensibility' lies in academic citation and industry adoption of its definitions, which are currently low given the zero-star engagement and limited fork activity over four years. In the field of Materials Science, such taxonomies are essential for regulatory and standardization purposes, but they do not possess a technical moat. Frontier AI labs (OpenAI, Anthropic) have little interest in the classification of physical biological materials, making frontier risk low. The primary competition comes from other academic groups (e.g., teams at Wyss Institute or Max Planck) who may propose competing nomenclatures in high-impact journals like Nature Materials. The 'displacement' would occur if a more comprehensive or widely-cited review paper gains traction. For a technical investor, this represents intellectual infrastructure rather than a scalable software asset.