Field guide · Five-candidate limit · 10 October 2026

What still exceeds five?

The current rule allows five indistinguishable remaining candidates. Free support starts at six and should leave at most five.

484 locality comparisons checked · 473 already within five · 11 fit after useful navigation · 0 supported targets still blind above five.

The comparison assumes all three provisional standard clues and the proposed locality are available. These are source-tree count diagnostics. Scientific eligibility and complete locality evidence still need approval.

Targets needing navigation

The same informative guesses are chosen for every answer in a remaining state. The actual target supplies the relationship feedback; it is never used to choose the probe. Every competitor and hypothetical outcome remains in the JSON.

Why the sauropod crowds are different

The earlier country-only Daye Group comparison for Damalasaurus and Chaya Group comparison for Microdontosaurus can initially retain 34 candidates. An Abrosaurus probe is selected from the remaining state alone. For either actual target, its Sauropoda feedback leaves at most five basal sauropods. Those five are acceptable under the new rule; their incomplete scientific profiles still need work.

A different possible response to the same probe would leave 19 mamenchisaurids. In these country-only Daye/Chaya comparisons, all 19 survive because relevant locality metadata is unknown; none is a recorded Daye match, and neither supported clue target lies in that branch. This is a footprint-completeness warning, not evidence for a 19-genus Daye assemblage or proof that those 19 genera fail with their own supported locality clues.

Before locality support

46 of the 63 representative standard-clue pools still need further evidence before a locality clue. That is why larger branches can still receive free locality support. None of the 484 supported target comparisons remains blind above five after its proposed locality and the demonstrated useful navigation.

What this changes

Baruungoyot’s five alvarezsaurids no longer require a further discovery-date clue solely for crowd size. Keep useful locality support for larger ordinary-clue pools. Discovery history remains a fallback if later evidence establishes a larger unresolved crowd.

Methods and limits

• With all three provisional standard clues revealed, all 484 chosen locality comparisons in all 63 matching source-clue pools are assessed. Their wider candidate sets and reaching-guess counts come from the complete locality validation, which also covers 108 large parent groups.
• If a validated maximum is already at most five, further observations cannot increase that state. For every larger comparison, reconstruct all previously recorded five-plus reaching states, use the same all-genus informative-probe selection, and stop at five.
• Every next probe is selected from the whole remaining state, without knowing the answer. The target then supplies the actual relationship feedback to trace its route through that fixed plan.
• Also inspect every possible wrong outcome, including competitors retained only by uncertain locality metadata. Such hypothetical outcomes are reported separately from failures for the supported clue target.
• All 63 direct-parent standard-clue pools receive a before-locality comparison with a representative supported genus. A largest reaching state demonstrates whether that pool still needs a locality clue or other evidence; it is not an exhaustive playthrough for every baseline target.
• The older four-candidate assessment is retained as a historical checkpoint. Current gameplay support starts at six remaining blind candidates and should leave at most five.
• Passing the candidate-count test does not approve a hidden answer, a complete fossil footprint or the future Expert working tree. Period, region, diet and historical taxon issues remain separate.
• Locality nonmatches are catalogue diagnostics, not proof of scientific absence. Known non-primary occurrences, qualified referrals and relevant unknown metadata remain possible.
• This is a reproducible informative navigation strategy, not an exhaustive optimal game policy or a guarantee that players select the same guesses.
• The frozen PBDB source hierarchy can contain unresolved sibling groups that a reviewed working tree may later distinguish. No new branches or roster exclusions are introduced.