Two people on the 14th-floor fire escape at 600 S. Michigan

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 Columbia College Chicago 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: Columbia College Chicago names itself and Chicago Police Department and Campus Security are cited as authorities.
  2. present: Chicago Police Department and Campus Security are named as responding authorities.
  3. present: Chicago Police Department and Campus Security are named as authorities and Columbia College Chicago is named.
  4. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and cites Chicago Police and Campus Security.
  5. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and Chicago Police plus Campus Security are cited.
  6. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself, and Chicago Police and Campus Security are cited.
  7. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and Chicago Police Department and Campus Security are named agencies.
  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 Chicago Police and Campus Security.
  10. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and Chicago Police Department plus Campus Security are named agencies.
  11. present: Chicago Police Department and Campus Security are named as responding authorities.
  12. present: Chicago Police Department and Campus Security are named as investigating and contact authorities.
  13. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself, and Chicago Police and Campus Security are named responding agencies.
  14. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and Chicago Police and Campus Security are cited.
  15. present: Chicago Police Department and Campus Security are named as authorities, and Columbia College Chicago names itself.
  16. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and Chicago Police and Campus Security are named agencies.
  17. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and Chicago Police and Campus Security are named agencies.
  18. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and cites Chicago Police and Campus Security.
  19. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself, and Chicago Police and Campus Security are named agencies.
  20. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and cites Chicago Police and Campus Security.
  21. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself, and Chicago Police Department and Campus Security are named agencies.
  22. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and Chicago Police and Campus Security are named agencies.
  23. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and cites Chicago Police and Campus Security.
  24. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and Chicago Police plus Campus Security are cited.
  25. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself to its community and Chicago Police and Campus Security are named agencies.
• Hazardpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  All 25 reads agree two people on the fire escape specify the suspicious activity.

  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: Two individuals observed on a fire escape specify the suspicious activity beyond a generic incident.
  2. present: Two individuals on the fire escape specify suspicious activity beyond a generic incident.
  3. present: Two individuals on the fire escape specify suspicious activity beyond a generic incident.
  4. present: Two people on the fire escape specify suspicious unauthorized persons rather than a generic incident.
  5. present: Two individuals on the fire escape specify the suspicious activity beyond a generic incident.
  6. present: Two individuals on the fire escape specify the activity beyond a generic incident.
  7. present: Two individuals on the 14th floor fire escape specify suspicious persons beyond a generic incident.
  8. present: Two individuals on the fire escape specify suspicious activity beyond a generic incident.
  9. present: Two individuals on the fire escape specify the threat beyond a generic incident.
  10. present: Two individuals on the fire escape specify a suspicious persons threat beyond a generic incident.
  11. present: Two individuals on the 14th floor fire escape specifies the suspicious activity beyond a generic incident.
  12. present: The advisory specifies two individuals observed on a fire escape rather than only a generic incident.
  13. present: Two individuals on the 14th floor fire escape specifies the threat beyond a generic incident.
  14. present: Unauthorized individuals on the fire escape specify the threat beyond a generic incident.
  15. present: The alert specifies two individuals observed on a fire escape rather than only a generic incident.
  16. present: Two individuals observed on a fire escape specify the suspicious event beyond a generic incident.
  17. present: Two individuals on the 14th floor fire escape specify the suspicious crime event.
  18. present: Two individuals on the fire escape specify suspicious activity beyond a generic incident.
  19. present: Two individuals on the fire escape specify suspicious unauthorized persons beyond a generic incident.
  20. present: The crime advisory describes two individuals on a fire escape as the threat.
  21. present: Two individuals on the fire escape specify suspicious activity beyond a generic incident.
  22. present: Two individuals on the fire escape specify the threat beyond a generic incident.
  23. present: Two individuals on the fire escape specify the threat beyond a generic incident.
  24. present: Two individuals on the fire escape specify the suspicious activity beyond a generic incident.
  25. present: Two individuals on the 14th floor fire escape specify unauthorized or suspicious persons rather than a generic incident.
• Locationpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  All 25 reads agree the 14th floor fire escape at 600 S. Michigan 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 14th floor fire escape in the alley of the 600 S. Michigan building is a named location.
  2. present: The 14th floor fire escape in the alley of the 600 S. Michigan building is a named place.
  3. present: The 14th floor fire escape in the alley of the 600 S. Michigan building is a named place.
  4. present: The 14th floor fire escape in the alley of 600 S. Michigan is a named place.
  5. present: The 14th floor fire escape in the alley of the 600 S. Michigan building is named.
  6. present: The 14th floor fire escape in the alley of the 600 S. Michigan building is named.
  7. present: The 14th floor fire escape in the alley of the 600 S. Michigan building is a named place.
  8. present: The 14th floor fire escape in the alley of the 600 S. Michigan building is a named place.
  9. present: The 14th floor fire escape in the alley of 600 S. Michigan building is named.
  10. present: The 14th floor fire escape in the alley of 600 S. Michigan building is a named place.
  11. present: The 14th floor fire escape in the alley of the 600 S. Michigan building is a named location.
  12. present: The 14th floor fire escape in the alley of the 600 S. Michigan building is named.
  13. present: The location is the 14th floor fire escape in the alley of the 600 S. Michigan building.
  14. present: The 14th floor fire escape at the alley of 600 S. Michigan building is named.
  15. present: The alert locates the event on the 14th floor fire escape in the alley of the 600 S. Michigan building.
  16. present: The 14th floor fire escape in the alley of the 600 S. Michigan building is named.
  17. present: The alley of the 600 S. Michigan building and 14th floor fire escape are named.
  18. present: The 14th floor fire escape in the alley of the 600 S. Michigan building is named.
  19. present: The 14th floor fire escape in the alley of the 600 S. Michigan building is a named place.
  20. present: The event is placed at the 14th floor fire escape in the alley of 600 S. Michigan.
  21. present: The 14th floor fire escape in the alley of the 600 S. Michigan building is a named place.
  22. present: The 14th floor fire escape in the alley of 600 S. Michigan building is named.
  23. present: The 14th floor fire escape in the alley of 600 S. Michigan building is named.
  24. present: The 14th floor fire escape in the alley of the 600 S. Michigan building is named.
  25. present: The 14th floor fire escape in the alley of the 600 S. Michigan building names a specific place.
• 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: Asking people to contact authorities with information is not a protective action instruction.
  2. absent: Asking people to contact police with information is not a protective action instruction.
  3. absent: Asking people with information to contact police is not a protective action.
  4. absent: Asking people to share tips is not a protective action instruction.
  5. absent: Asking people with information to contact authorities is not a protective action.
  6. absent: Asking people to share information with police is not a protective action.
  7. absent: Asking anyone with information to contact Campus Security is not a protective action.
  8. absent: Asking people to contact Campus Security with information is not a protective action.
  9. absent: Asking people to share information is not a protective action instruction.
  10. absent: Asking people to contact Campus Security with information is not a protective action instruction.
  11. absent: Asking people to contact police with tips is not a protective action instruction.
  12. absent: Asking people with information to call detectives is not a protective action instruction.
  13. absent: Telling people with information to contact Campus Security is not a protective action for recipients.
  14. absent: Asking people with information to contact police is not a protective action.
  15. absent: The only ask is to contact authorities with information, which is not a protective action for recipients.
  16. absent: Asking people to contact investigators with information is not a protective action.
  17. absent: Asking people to contact investigators with tips is not a protective action.
  18. absent: Asking people to contact police with information is not a protective action instruction.
  19. absent: Asking anyone with information to contact Campus Security is not a protective action.
  20. absent: Asking people with information to call is not a protective action instruction.
  21. absent: Asking people with information to contact authorities is not a protective action.
  22. absent: Asking people with information to contact authorities is not a protective action.
  23. absent: Asking people to share information is not a protective action instruction.
  24. absent: Asking witnesses to contact police is not a protective action instruction.
  25. absent: Asking people to contact Campus Security with information is not a protective action instruction.
• Timepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  All 25 reads agree July 19, 2026 and July 17 5:50pm-6:26pm are time cues.

  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 advisory is dated July 19, 2026 and the incident occurred July 17 between 5:50pm and 6:26pm.
  2. present: The advisory gives dates and a clock time window of 5:50pm to 6:26pm on July 17.
  3. present: The advisory is dated July 19, 2026 and the incident occurred July 17 between 5:50pm and 6:26pm.
  4. present: The message is dated July 19, 2026 and the event is timed July 17 between 5:50pm and 6:26pm.
  5. present: The advisory is dated July 19, 2026 and times the incident July 17 between 5:50pm and 6:26pm.
  6. present: The incident is placed on July 17 between 5:50pm and 6:26pm.
  7. present: The message is dated July 19, 2026 and the incident is timed July 17 between 5:50pm and 6:26pm.
  8. present: The advisory is dated July 19, 2026 and times the incident July 17 between 5:50pm and 6:26pm.
  9. present: The incident is timed to July 17 between 5:50pm and 6:26pm.
  10. present: The advisory is dated July 19, 2026 and the incident is timed July 17 between 5:50pm and 6:26pm.
  11. present: The message dates July 19, 2026 and places the incident on July 17 between 5:50pm and 6:26pm.
  12. present: The message gives July 17 and a 5:50pm to 6:26pm window plus a July 19 date.
  13. present: Dates July 19, 2026 and July 17, plus 5:50pm to 6:26pm, convey when.
  14. present: The advisory gives the date July 17 and a clock window of 5:50pm to 6:26pm.
  15. present: The alert includes the dates July 19 and July 17 and the time window 5:50pm to 6:26pm.
  16. present: The alert gives July 19 and July 17 plus the 5:50pm to 6:26pm window.
  17. present: The advisory date and the July 17 window from 5:50pm to 6:26pm are given.
  18. present: The advisory is dated July 19, 2026 and times the incident between 5:50pm and 6:26pm on July 17.
  19. present: The message is dated July 19, 2026 and the event is timed July 17 between 5:50pm and 6:26pm.
  20. present: The message is dated July 19, 2026 and times the incident between 5:50pm and 6:26pm on July 17.
  21. present: The message is dated July 19, 2026 and times the incident July 17 between 5:50pm and 6:26pm.
  22. present: July 17 between 5:50pm and 6:26pm gives date and clock times for the incident.
  23. present: The incident is timed to July 17 between 5:50pm and 6:26pm.
  24. present: The advisory is dated July 19, 2026 and the incident is timed July 17 between 5:50pm and 6:26pm.
  25. present: The incident is timed to July 17 between 5:50pm and 6:26pm and the message is dated July 19, 2026.
• Impactabsent0/25

  Final assessment

  All 25 reads find no stated harm or severity beyond the observation.

  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: Observing two people on a fire escape states no harm, consequences, or severity.
  2. absent: No consequence or severity of the observed activity is described.
  3. absent: Observing two people on a fire escape states no harm, consequence, or severity.
  4. absent: Observation of two people on a fire escape states no consequence or severity.
  5. absent: Observing two people on a fire escape states no consequences or severity.
  6. absent: Observing two people on a fire escape states no harm, consequence, or severity.
  7. absent: Observing two individuals on a fire escape states no harm, consequence, or severity.
  8. absent: Observing two people on a fire escape states no consequences or severity.
  9. absent: Observing two people is stated with no consequences or severity.
  10. absent: The alert describes the observation but not consequences or severity of the hazard.
  11. absent: Observing two people on a fire escape states no consequences or severity of the hazard.
  12. absent: No injury, harm, or other consequence of the observed individuals is stated.
  13. absent: People seen on a fire escape names the event without consequences or severity.
  14. absent: No consequence or severity is stated beyond observing two people on the fire escape.
  15. absent: Observing two people on a fire escape does not state consequences or severity of the hazard.
  16. absent: Seeing two people on a fire escape does not state consequences or severity of harm.
  17. absent: Observing two people is described without consequences or severity of harm.
  18. absent: No consequence or severity of the observed activity is described.
  19. absent: Observing two people on a fire escape states no harm, consequence, or severity.
  20. absent: Observing two people on a fire escape states no consequences or severity.
  21. absent: Observing two people on a fire escape states no harm, consequence, or severity.
  22. absent: Observing two people is stated with no consequence or severity.
  23. absent: Observing two people is stated with no consequences or severity.
  24. absent: No consequences or severity of the observed individuals are described.
  25. absent: Observing two people on a fire escape does not state consequences, harm, or severity.