Add North Star preamble to research brief; refresh PDF.

First-time readers get Presence + Recommendability framing before Pain;
regenerated research-brief.pdf to match.

docs/ALTERNATE_BUSINESS_PROPOSAL.md

@@ -89,7 +89,7 @@ We win if we are the shortest path from “AI can’t find / trust / correctly d
 
 Refocused 2026-10-01 so every section ladders to BUSINESS_PLAN North Star intent + concept Presence/Recommendability. Evidence from Localeze research and r/localseo; statistics are practitioner-reported, not independently replicated.
 
-**Research brief appended 2026-10-01** — verbose evidence synthesis below (section RESEARCH BRIEF). PDF export: [`docs/research-brief.pdf`](./research-brief.pdf). Does not replace North Star / Problem / Solution / Differentiators / Open questions; amends Capture with this date stamp only.
+**Research brief appended 2026-10-01; North Star preamble added same day** — verbose evidence synthesis below (section RESEARCH BRIEF). PDF export: [`docs/research-brief.pdf`](./research-brief.pdf). Does not replace North Star / Problem / Solution / Differentiators / Open questions; amends Capture with this date stamp only.
 
 ---
 
@@ -100,6 +100,15 @@ Refocused 2026-10-01 so every section ladders to BUSINESS_PLAN North Star intent
 **Branch:** `planning-selfserve-audit`  
 **Relationship:** Append-only evidence layer for this alternate proposal. Does not replace the concept SoT ([`SELF_SERVE_AI_DISCOVERABILITY_CONCEPT.md`](./SELF_SERVE_AI_DISCOVERABILITY_CONCEPT.md)). Labels below: **practitioner-reported** (r/localseo / agency anecdotes), **vendor** (product marketing or vendor research), **primary study** (named methodology / published research). Flag **UNVERIFIED** where community claim or secondary paraphrase lacks a clean primary cite.
 
+### North Star (how to read this brief)
+
+The North Star for GEOLOCAL is **agent-era local SMB discoverability**: local businesses **discovered and recommended by AI assistants**. That intent (from [`BUSINESS_PLAN.md`](./BUSINESS_PLAN.md)) is scored on this branch as two outcomes:
+
+- **Presence** — being present and accurately represented wherever a local business is discovered (majors, umbrellas, directories, and the copies assistants lean on).
+- **Recommendability** — would an AI pick you for a real buyer ask, and would it **get you right** (not just mention you)?
+
+Everything below is evidence gathered **in service of that North Star** — what practitioners and vendors say moves Maps/calls vs what actually bears on AI Presence and Recommendability, what is waste, and where the proof is thin. It is not a general local-SEO encyclopedia; read every finding against “does this help an owner become discoverable and accurately recommended by agents?”
+
 ### Pain
 
 Local owners and agencies are stuck between two scoreboards that do not agree.