Yes. The records fall into three natural groups by **Species**, and the measurements back this up. **The grouping:** The dataset has 150 flowers, split evenly into *Iris-setosa*, *Iris-versicolor* and *Iris-virginica* with 50 each (from the `Iris_by_Species` gold table). Because the groups are balanced, no species dominates any comparison. **Petal size separates the groups best:** - **Setosa is cleanly isolated.** Its petal length runs 1.0–1.9 cm, and the shortest versicolor petal is 3.0 cm. Its petal width runs 0.1–0.6 cm, against a versicolor minimum of 1.0 cm. A single threshold on petal size identifies setosa with no overlap in this data. - **Versicolor and virginica are adjacent and overlap slightly.** - Median petal length is 4.35 cm for versicolor and 5.55 cm for virginica. - Average petal width is 1.33 cm for versicolor and 2.03 cm for virginica. - Petal length ranges overlap between 4.5 and 5.1 cm, and petal width ranges overlap between 1.4 and 1.8 cm. A petal rule gets most of these two right but not all, so separating them cleanly needs a combination of features. **Sepal size is a weaker separator.** Sepal length averages 5.0, 5.9 and 6.6 cm across the three species, but the ranges overlap heavily. Sepal width is the least useful: setosa is widest on average (3.42 cm) but its range of 2.3–4.4 cm overlaps the others. **In practice:** - Use Species as the primary segment. - If you need to recover the groups without the label, for example by clustering, petal length and petal width are the features to use. Expect setosa to form one distinct cluster and versicolor and virginica to form two touching ones. I only compared per-species summary statistics. I did not run a clustering algorithm or test a specific classification rule, so the overlap findings come from min/max ranges rather than measured misclassification rates.