One normalized question wording appeared twice in our fixed study of 75 saved dives and 525 prompt slots. That observation describes the sample. It does not establish the probability of tomorrow’s question repeating.
What repeated in the sample?
Keep the full suffix condition beside the score. This is the earlier saved record, not a live replay captured on July 16.
After the study’s normalization of case and punctuation, there were 524 unique wordings across 525 slots. The repeated task asked for a chemical element whose name ends in “-ium.”
- July 16, 2026, prompt 5: 79 saved answers; Dysprosium at 100.
- September 21, 2026, prompt 5: 79 saved answers; Ytterbium at 100.
The wording differs in punctuation around the suffix. Normalized equality is not a claim that every raw character or source field is identical.
What do the two records show?
The two screens let you inspect the changed grade directly. Equal roster sizes do not mean equal assignments; the comparison table separates those counts from the named-answer result.
| Saved count or answer | July 16 | September 21 |
|---|---|---|
| Total entries | 79 | 79 |
| Deep Cut entries | 38 | 46 |
| Rare entries | 17 | 17 |
| Schooler entries | 13 | 10 |
| Too Clever entries | 2 | 0 |
| Plankton entries | 8 | 5 |
| Dysprosium | 100 | 85 |
| Ytterbium | 85 | 100 |
Deep Cut has eight more entries in the later saved roster: 46 − 38 = 8. Equal overall counts do not prove a complete periodic-table dictionary, and changes in counts alone do not identify which entries moved between tiers. Oganesson does not end in “-ium” and is not part of this example.
What can we infer, and what remains unknown?
The same task can have different recorded grades. Keep the date and question beside a saved score rather than treating Dysprosium as permanently worth 100.
- The older data includes compiled historical records; it is not a replay of the official game captured at the time of this analysis.
- Two saved sources do not establish why the official editor made a choice or when a revision happened.
- One duplicate occurrence divided by 525 is about 0.19% of this sample’s slots. It is not a forecast that future repeat odds are below 1 in 500.
- Similar subject matter with a different qualifier is not an exact repeated task.
Check a familiar question before reusing an answer
- Read the full wording, including era, season, medium and spelling conditions.
- Open the dated sheet rather than relying on a remembered score.
- Check the candidate’s actual tier in that record.
- If a new question changes a condition, check fit again before considering rarity.
For example, “Summer Olympics” and “multiple Olympic gold medals” ask different things. Familiar subject matter does not make the answer sets interchangeable.
Reproduce the observation
Download the fixed 525-row study CSV, retain its date window, and inspect the two “-ium” rows. Read the study’s normalization and limits before counting unique wordings differently.
For a current date, use Archive. For a recent question you want to try before revealing answers, choose an available dive in untimed practice; not every historical sheet remains playable.