Implied-weapon phone robbery near 700 South Clark

To check this alert, SuperGrok Heavy 4.5 (an AI) read it in full 25 separate times, independently. Each read decided whether the message answers each of the six questions and gave a short reason. A final reviewer then weighed all 25 and wrote the plain-English verdict you see when you open a row. The score (for example 22/25) is how many reads agreed; the 25 individual reads are tucked underneath if you want to check them.

• Sourcepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  All 25 reads agree the college names itself and police/Campus Security are named agencies.

  Who is sending the alert and who is responding. People act faster on a message from a clearly identifiable, credible sender, such as a named department, the police, or a branded alert system, than on an anonymous notice. A branded signature counts.

  See all 25 individual reads

  1. present: The message addresses the Columbia College Chicago Community and names the Chicago Police Department as the investigating agency.
  2. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and Chicago Police Department and Campus Security are named agencies.
  3. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself addressing the community and Chicago Police Department is the investigating agency.
  4. present: The message addresses the Columbia College Chicago Community and names the Chicago Police Department.
  5. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and Chicago Police Department and Campus Security are named agencies.
  6. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and the Chicago Police Department is a named agency.
  7. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and the Chicago Police Department is identified as the investigating agency.
  8. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and Chicago Police Department and Campus Security are named agencies.
  9. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and cites the Chicago Police Department and Campus Security.
  10. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and the Chicago Police Department is identified as the investigating agency.
  11. present: The message addresses the Columbia College Chicago Community and names the Chicago Police Department.
  12. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and Chicago Police Department and Campus Security are named agencies.
  13. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself in the greeting and the Chicago Police Department is identified as the investigating agency.
  14. present: The header names Columbia College Chicago and the Chicago Police Department is identified as the investigating agency.
  15. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself, and Chicago Police Department and Campus Security are named agencies.
  16. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and Chicago Police Department and Campus Security appear as agencies.
  17. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and Chicago Police Department and Campus Security are named agencies.
  18. present: The message addresses the Columbia College Chicago Community and names Chicago Police Department and Campus Security.
  19. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and Chicago Police Department and Campus Security are named agencies.
  20. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and Chicago Police Department and Campus Security are named agencies.
  21. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and Chicago Police Department and Campus Security are named agencies.
  22. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself in the greeting and the Chicago Police Department is a named investigating agency.
  23. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself as the sender, and the Chicago Police Department is a named agency.
  24. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and Chicago Police Department and Campus Security are named agencies.
  25. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself, and Chicago Police Department and Campus Security are named agencies.
• Hazardpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  All 25 reads agree implied-weapon robbery taking a cell phone names a specific hazard.

  What the threat actually is. A complete warning names the specific danger, such as a shooter, a fire, a tornado, or a gas leak, rather than a vague emergency, because people decide what to do based on what they are facing.

  See all 25 individual reads

  1. present: The alert describes a robbery in which offenders implied a weapon and took a cell phone.
  2. present: Robbery with an implied weapon and taking a cell phone names a specific threat.
  3. present: The alert names a robbery in which offenders implied a weapon and took a cell phone.
  4. present: The alert names a robbery in which offenders implied a weapon and took a cell phone.
  5. present: Robbery with an implied weapon and taking a cell phone names a specific threat.
  6. present: Robbery with an implied weapon and taking a cell phone names a specific threat.
  7. present: Robbery with an implied weapon and taking a cell phone is a specific threat.
  8. present: A robbery in which offenders implied a weapon and took a cell phone specifies the crime rather than a generic incident.
  9. present: Offenders implied a weapon and took a cell phone, naming a specific robbery rather than a generic incident.
  10. present: The alert names a robbery in which offenders implied a weapon and took a cell phone.
  11. present: The alert names a robbery in which offenders implied a weapon and took a cell phone.
  12. present: Robbery in which offenders implied a weapon and took a cell phone is a specific threat.
  13. present: Robbery with an implied weapon and taking a cell phone is a specific threat.
  14. present: The alert names a robbery in which offenders implied a weapon and took a cell phone.
  15. present: Robbery in which offenders implied a weapon and took a cell phone is a specific threat.
  16. present: The alert specifies a robbery in which offenders implied a weapon and took a cell phone.
  17. present: Robbery with an implied weapon and taking a cell phone is a specific threat.
  18. present: Implying a weapon and taking a cell phone is a specific robbery rather than a generic incident.
  19. present: A robbery in which offenders implied a weapon and took a cell phone specifies a threat rather than a generic incident.
  20. present: A robbery in which offenders implied a weapon and took a cell phone is a specific threat, not a generic incident.
  21. present: Robbery with an implied weapon and taking a cell phone is a specific threat.
  22. present: Robbery with an implied weapon and taking a cell phone is a specific threat.
  23. present: The alert names a robbery in which offenders implied a weapon and took a cell phone, a specific threat.
  24. present: Offenders implying a weapon and taking a cell phone specify a robbery rather than a generic incident.
  25. present: Robbery in which offenders implied a weapon and took a cell phone is a specific threat, not a generic incident.
• Locationpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  All 25 reads agree 700 South Clark Street is a location.

  Where the threat is. Saying whether danger is in a specific building, a part of campus, or area-wide lets people judge their own proximity and choose a safe direction. Without a where, a warning is hard to act on precisely.

  See all 25 individual reads

  1. present: The alert names 700 South Clark Street as the location.
  2. present: The robbery is placed near 700 South Clark Street.
  3. present: The robbery is placed near 700 South Clark Street.
  4. present: The robbery is placed near 700 South Clark Street.
  5. present: The robbery is placed near 700 South Clark Street.
  6. present: The robbery is placed near 700 South Clark Street.
  7. present: The robbery is placed near 700 South Clark Street.
  8. present: The robbery occurred near 700 South Clark Street, a street address.
  9. present: The incident is placed near 700 South Clark Street.
  10. present: The robbery is placed near 700 South Clark Street.
  11. present: The robbery occurred near 700 South Clark Street.
  12. present: The robbery is placed near 700 South Clark Street.
  13. present: The robbery is placed near 700 South Clark Street.
  14. present: The robbery is located near 700 South Clark Street.
  15. present: The robbery is placed near 700 South Clark Street.
  16. present: The robbery is placed near 700 South Clark Street.
  17. present: The robbery is placed near 700 South Clark Street.
  18. present: The robbery is placed near 700 South Clark Street.
  19. present: The robbery is placed near 700 South Clark Street.
  20. present: The robbery is located near 700 South Clark Street.
  21. present: The robbery is located near 700 South Clark Street.
  22. present: The robbery is placed near 700 South Clark Street.
  23. present: The alert places the robbery near 700 South Clark Street.
  24. present: The robbery is placed near 700 South Clark Street.
  25. present: The robbery occurred near 700 South Clark Street.
• Guidanceabsent0/25

  Final assessment

  All 25 reads find only a request for tips, which is not protective guidance.

  The protective action to take. A clear, specific instruction, such as shelter in place, evacuate, avoid the area, or run-hide-fight, drives faster and more correct protective behavior than describing the threat alone.

  See all 25 individual reads

  1. absent: Recipients are only asked to share tips with Campus Security and detectives, which is not protective guidance.
  2. absent: The only ask is to contact Campus Security and detectives with information, which is not protective guidance.
  3. absent: Asking anyone with information to contact Campus Security and detectives is a tips request, not protective action.
  4. absent: The only ask is to contact Campus Security and detectives with tips, which is not protective guidance.
  5. absent: Asking anyone with information to contact Campus Security and detectives is a tips request, not protective action.
  6. absent: Asking anyone with additional information to contact Campus Security and detectives is a tips request, not protective action.
  7. absent: Asking anyone with information to contact Campus Security and detectives is a tips request, not protective action.
  8. absent: Asking anyone with additional information to contact Campus Security and detectives is a tips request, not protective guidance.
  9. absent: Recipients are only asked to share tips with Campus Security and police, which is not protective guidance.
  10. absent: Asking anyone with information to contact Campus Security and detectives is a tips request, not protective guidance.
  11. absent: The closing only requests tips to Campus Security and detectives, which is not protective action.
  12. absent: Contacting Campus Security and detectives with information is a tips request, not protective guidance.
  13. absent: The text only asks people with information to contact Campus Security and detectives, which is not protective guidance.
  14. absent: Recipients are only asked to contact Campus Security and detectives with information, and tips requests are not guidance.
  15. absent: Asking anyone with information to contact Campus Security and detectives is a tips request, not protective action.
  16. absent: Asking anyone with information to contact Campus Security and Chicago Police is a request for tips, not protective guidance.
  17. absent: Asking anyone with information to contact Campus Security and detectives is a tip request, not protective action.
  18. absent: The only ask is that people with information contact Campus Security and detectives, which is a tips request not protective guidance.
  19. absent: Asking anyone with information to contact Campus Security and detectives is a tips request, not protective action.
  20. absent: Asking anyone with additional information to contact Campus Security or detectives is a tips request, not protective action.
  21. absent: Asking anyone with information to contact Campus Security and detectives is a tips request, not protective guidance.
  22. absent: Asking anyone with information to contact Campus Security and detectives is a tips request, not protective action.
  23. absent: The only ask is to contact Campus Security and detectives with tips, which is not protective guidance.
  24. absent: The text only requests tips for Campus Security and detectives rather than instructing protective action.
  25. absent: Recipients are only asked to share information with Campus Security and detectives, not given a protective instruction.
• Timepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  All 25 reads agree February 23 at 9:30 p.m. is a time cue.

  When the message applies. A timestamp, the word now or immediately, or a phrase like until further notice tells the reader whether the danger is current and how quickly to act.

  See all 25 individual reads

  1. present: The robbery is dated February 23 at 9:30 p.m.
  2. present: The robbery is dated February 23 at 9:30 p.m.
  3. present: The robbery occurred on February 23 at 9:30 p.m.
  4. present: The robbery is dated February 23 at 9:30 p.m.
  5. present: The robbery is dated February 23 at 9:30 p.m.
  6. present: The robbery is dated February 23 at 9:30 p.m.
  7. present: The robbery occurred on February 23 at 9:30 p.m.
  8. present: The incident is dated February 23 at 9:30 p.m.
  9. present: The robbery is dated February 23 at 9:30 p.m.
  10. present: The robbery is dated February 23 at 9:30 p.m.
  11. present: The robbery is dated February 23 at 9:30 p.m.
  12. present: The robbery occurred on February 23 at 9:30 p.m.
  13. present: The robbery occurred on February 23 at 9:30 p.m.
  14. present: The robbery is dated February 23 at 9:30 p.m.
  15. present: The robbery occurred on February 23 at 9:30 p.m.
  16. present: The incident is dated February 23 at 9:30 p.m.
  17. present: The alert gives February 23 and the clock time of 9:30 p.m.
  18. present: The alert gives the date February 23 and the clock time of 9:30 p.m.
  19. present: The robbery occurred on February 23 at 9:30 p.m.
  20. present: The alert dates the robbery February 23 at 9:30 p.m. and the advisory February 24, 2026.
  21. present: The robbery is dated February 23 at 9:30 p.m.
  22. present: The robbery occurred on February 23 at 9:30 p.m.
  23. present: The robbery is dated February 23 at 9:30 p.m.
  24. present: The robbery occurred on February 23 at 9:30 p.m.
  25. present: The robbery is dated February 23 at 9:30 p.m., and the advisory is dated February 24, 2026.
• Impactabsent0/25

  Final assessment

  A majority find no stated consequence beyond naming the robbery.

  What the hazard could do to the people in its path. Beyond naming the threat, a complete warning conveys its potential consequences or severity, such as that a tornado can level buildings or that a leak could be explosive, so recipients grasp how much danger they are in. Research on warning message content finds that a concrete impact statement helps people personalize their risk and act sooner.

  See all 25 individual reads

  1. absent: Naming a robbery and theft of a cell phone does not state consequences or severity.
  2. absent: Naming robbery and theft of a cell phone does not state harm, injury, or other severity.
  3. absent: Naming robbery and taking a cell phone states the crime itself without further harm or severity.
  4. absent: Naming a robbery and phone theft does not state harm, injury, or other consequences to the victim.
  5. absent: Naming robbery and theft of a cell phone does not state harm, injury, or other severity.
  6. absent: Naming robbery and theft of a cell phone does not state harm or severity beyond the crime itself.
  7. absent: Naming robbery and cell phone theft does not state extra harm, injury, or severity.
  8. absent: Naming robbery and taking a cell phone states the crime itself without further consequences or severity.
  9. absent: Naming the robbery and phone theft states the crime itself with no extra consequence or severity.
  10. absent: Naming a robbery and cell phone theft does not state consequences or severity.
  11. absent: Naming a robbery and phone theft does not state harm or severity to the victim.
  12. absent: Naming robbery and taking a cell phone does not state harm, injury, or other severity.
  13. absent: Naming robbery and taking a cell phone does not state harm or other severity beyond the crime itself.
  14. absent: Naming a robbery and theft of a cell phone does not state harm or other consequences or severity.
  15. absent: Naming the robbery and phone theft states the crime itself with no further harm or severity.
  16. absent: Naming the robbery and phone theft states the hazard and does not convey further consequences or severity.
  17. absent: Naming the robbery and taking a cell phone describes the crime itself, not added consequences or severity.
  18. absent: Naming the robbery and phone theft is the crime itself, with no added consequence or severity stated.
  19. absent: Naming the robbery and phone theft states the crime itself, not extra harm or severity.
  20. absent: Naming robbery and taking a cell phone restates the crime itself and does not add separate consequences or severity.
  21. absent: Naming robbery and theft of a cell phone does not state harm, injury, or other severity.
  22. absent: Naming robbery and cell phone theft does not state consequences or severity beyond the crime itself.
  23. absent: Naming robbery and phone theft describes the crime but does not state bodily harm or other severity beyond the robbery itself.
  24. absent: Naming robbery and taking a cell phone describes the crime itself without extra harm or severity.
  25. absent: Naming the robbery and taking a cell phone does not state harm, injury, or added severity.