Male subject looking into apartment windows at MMC

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

  S 25/25 majority present. TIMELY WARNING is a branded header and FIUPD is named as the police issuer of the notice.

  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 header TIMELY WARNING plus FIUPD in the body identify campus police as the sender.
  2. present: FIUPD is the unit that received the three reports and that asks readers to call, so police are the authority.
  3. present: We are issuing this Timely Warning Notice is the campus speaking as the originator.
  4. present: Opening TIMELY WARNING is a branded Clery product tag, which the rubric counts as source.
  5. present: Call FIUPD immediately at the listed campus numbers names FIU police as the issuing agency.
  6. present: Florida International University Police appear as FIUPD throughout the warning.
  7. present: The Clery footer says we are issuing this notice, tying the text to the campus issuer.
  8. present: FIUPD is asking for community assistance names campus police as the speaker.
  9. present: Reports to FIUPD plus a Timely Warning Notice header together identify who sent it.
  10. present: The emergency and non-emergency FIUPD lines brand the notice as a police product.
  11. present: A timely warning issued in compliance with Clery is still a named campus warning product.
  12. present: MMC and FIUPD together place the sender as FIU police rather than an unnamed office.
  13. present: The first line is a TIMELY WARNING banner, a branded signature at the start.
  14. present: FIUPD of a male subject looking into windows credits campus police as the reporting authority.
  15. present: The notice tells people to call FIUPD, which identifies the department behind the alert.
  16. present: Timely Warning Notice in quotation marks is the labeled product of the issuing campus.
  17. present: FIU police initials FIUPD appear in the lead, the tip request, and the phone block.
  18. present: Who is sending is FIUPD, named as the agency taking reports and soliciting IDs.
  19. present: The Jeanne Clery timely warning frame presents the university as the disclosing source.
  20. present: Students are asked to call FIUPD, so the campus police department is the named authority.
  21. present: This pass treats TIMELY WARNING as a sender tag equivalent to a branded alert name.
  22. present: FIUPD is written as the recipient of the window reports, which IDs the police source.
  23. present: Issuing this Timely Warning Notice is first-person campus voice after FIUPD is named.
  24. present: The phone block lists FIUPD non-emergency and emergency numbers, marking police as sender.
  25. present: Source is present because both the TIMELY WARNING label and FIUPD appear in the text.
• Hazardpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  H 25/25 majority present. A male subject looking into student windows names peeping, not a generic incident.

  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: A male subject looking into student windows is a specific peeping threat, not a generic incident.
  2. present: Looking into student windows names voyeurism rather than an unspecified emergency or situation.
  3. present: The lead names the crime as a male looking into student windows at the apartments.
  4. present: This type of criminal activity is specified as window peeping, a concrete named hazard.
  5. present: Three incidents of a male subject looking into windows name a repeating peeping hazard.
  6. present: Peeping into rooms is the threat the coverings advice is written to stop.
  7. present: Unknown white male looking into student windows is a specific named offense, not situation alone.
  8. present: The person engaged in this type of criminal activity is identified as window watching.
  9. present: Looking into the rooms is restated as the hazard the closed coverings are meant to prevent.
  10. present: A male subject looking into student windows is more specific than incident or emergency alone.
  11. present: Window peeping at student apartments is the named crime pattern, not a vague situation.
  12. present: The suspect looking into windows is the specific threat FIUPD wants identified.
  13. present: Looking into student windows names the hazard with enough specificity to code present.
  14. present: Criminal activity is not left generic; it is looking into student windows.
  15. present: White male in a black four door sedan looking into windows is still a named peeping threat.
  16. present: Three incidents of looking into student windows specify voyeurism as the hazard.
  17. present: Discourage anyone from looking into the rooms restates looking-in as the named threat.
  18. present: A male subject looking into windows is a specific threat under the Hazard rubric.
  19. present: Window watching at student apartments is named; generic incident is not left standing alone.
  20. present: Looking into student windows is the hazard; incident by itself would not have been enough.
  21. present: The criminal activity FIUPD wants identified is looking into student windows.
  22. present: Peeping through student windows is a specific threat, not emergency or situation alone.
  23. present: Three window-peeping reports name a repeating voyeurism hazard with a suspect vehicle.
  24. present: A male looking into student windows is the specific threat the warning exists to name.
  25. present: Looking into student windows at the apartments is a named peeping hazard, so H is present.
• Locationpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  L 25/25 majority present. University Apartment complex at MMC is a named campus housing place.

  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: University Apartment complex at MMC names the housing site on that campus.
  2. present: The complex is identified as the University Apartment complex, a named campus housing place.
  3. present: MMC locates the apartments on FIU's Modesto Maidique Campus, a named campus area.
  4. present: If anyone sees anything suspicious in any housing facility still places the where in housing.
  5. present: University Apartment complex is a building-level named place, which satisfies Location.
  6. present: The campus community close plus MMC together locate the warning on campus.
  7. present: At the University Apartment complex at MMC is a named place plus campus abbreviation.
  8. present: Housing facility in the tip line still points to campus housing as the location class.
  9. present: MMC is the campus code attached to the University Apartment complex.
  10. present: University Apartment complex names the place, and campus community repeats an on-campus where.
  11. present: The incidents are at the University Apartment complex, a hall-like named housing site.
  12. present: Any housing facility plus University Apartment complex keep the location on campus housing.
  13. present: At MMC is a campus location tag attached to the apartment complex.
  14. present: University Apartment complex at MMC is both a named complex and a campus.
  15. present: The where is the University Apartment complex, not an unnamed off-campus block.
  16. present: Campus community in the close is an on-campus where the Location rubric allows.
  17. present: University Apartment complex is the named place where the three reports occurred.
  18. present: MMC plus University Apartment complex give a campus and a named housing complex.
  19. present: Suspicious activity in any housing facility still names housing as the place of concern.
  20. present: The University Apartment complex at MMC is a mapped campus housing location.
  21. present: Named place University Apartment complex satisfies Location even without a street number.
  22. present: On the MMC campus at the University Apartment complex is a campus-plus-building where.
  23. present: University Apartment complex is the scene, and housing facility repeats that geography.
  24. present: MMC is a campus, and University Apartment complex is the named housing place on it.
  25. present: University Apartment complex at MMC, campus community, and housing facility all give a where.
• Guidancepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  G 25/25 majority present. Lock doors and windows, close coverings, and call FIUPD immediately are protective actions.

  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. present: Students are told to lock front doors and windows and to call FIUPD immediately if they see anything suspicious.
  2. present: Keep their window coverings closed is a protective instruction meant to block the peeping.
  3. present: Ensure their front doors and windows are locked and secure is a lock-doors order.
  4. present: Call FIUPD immediately is a call-the-police instruction, which the rubric treats as guidance.
  5. present: Be vigilant about their surroundings plus lock doors and windows tells students what to do.
  6. present: Students are encouraged to keep window coverings closed so nobody can look into the rooms.
  7. present: Lock and secure front doors and windows is the same lock-doors action the rubric lists.
  8. present: If anyone sees anything suspicious you are asked to call FIUPD immediately is recipient action.
  9. present: We are asking that all students ensure doors and windows are locked is second-person guidance.
  10. present: Closed window coverings are urged to discourage anyone from looking into the rooms.
  11. present: Vigilant about surroundings and locked doors together instruct protective behavior.
  12. present: Call FIUPD at the non-emergency or emergency number is a directed protective call.
  13. present: Front doors and windows locked and secure is an instruction to the student reader.
  14. present: Keep window coverings closed to discourage looking in is explicit protective advice.
  15. present: Asked to call FIUPD immediately if they see anything suspicious in housing is guidance.
  16. present: Lock doors and windows, then close coverings, are stacked protective actions.
  17. present: Ensure doors and windows are locked and secure is an action instruction, not a responder status.
  18. present: Community members who see something suspicious in housing are told to call FIUPD.
  19. present: Be vigilant and lock doors are recipient instructions, unlike FIUPD investigating.
  20. present: Keep window coverings closed is an avoid-being-seen instruction to occupants.
  21. present: Call FIUPD immediately at the printed numbers is protective action to the reader.
  22. present: Locked and secure doors and windows tell students the protective step to take tonight.
  23. present: Students should stay vigilant, lock up, close coverings, and call police if they see something.
  24. present: The lock-windows and close-coverings lines are instructions to occupants, not status reports.
  25. present: Lock doors, close coverings, and call FIUPD immediately are three protective actions.
• Timepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  T 25/25 majority present. August 25, 2023, the July 3 to August 24 window, midnight to 5:30 a.m., and immediately all supply time.

  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: TIMELY WARNING August 25, 2023 puts an explicit calendar date on the notice.
  2. present: The reported incidents occurred between midnight and 5:30 a.m., which are clock times.
  3. present: Between July 3, 2023, and August 24, 2023 is a dated window for the three reports.
  4. present: Call FIUPD immediately uses immediately, a recency word listed in the Time rubric.
  5. present: August 25, 2023 in the first line is a date, which the Time element requires.
  6. present: Midnight to 5:30 a.m. is the clock span when the looking-in incidents happened.
  7. present: The three reports fall between July 3 and August 24, 2023, two calendar dates.
  8. present: As of the August 25, 2023 warning date, the latest report is August 24, 2023.
  9. present: The header date August 25, 2023 and the overnight clock window both supply when.
  10. present: Immediately in the call-FIUPD sentence is a listed Time cue even without a clock.
  11. present: July 3, 2023 through August 24, 2023 dates the three reported incidents.
  12. present: Between midnight and 5:30 a.m. is an overnight clock range for when the looking occurred.
  13. present: August 25, 2023 is the warning date printed on the TIMELY WARNING line.
  14. present: The overnight hours midnight to 5:30 a.m. are clock times, so Time is present.
  15. present: The span July 3, 2023 to August 24, 2023 is a pair of dates the rubric counts.
  16. present: Immediately after see anything suspicious is a now-style Time word.
  17. present: August 25, 2023, July 3, 2023, and August 24, 2023 are three dates in the text.
  18. present: The incidents occurred between midnight and 5:30 a.m., a clock interval.
  19. present: The warning is dated August 25, 2023 on the first line.
  20. present: July 3, 2023 and August 24, 2023 bookend the reporting period with dates.
  21. present: Midnight and 5:30 a.m. are clock times, and August 25, 2023 is a date.
  22. present: Immediately is used for when to call, which the Time rubric lists as a valid cue.
  23. present: The overnight clock window midnight to 5:30 a.m. is when the looking-in happened.
  24. present: Dates July 3, August 24, and August 25, 2023 all appear as calendar Time cues.
  25. present: Clock times, three dates, and immediately each independently satisfy the Time element.
• Impactpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  I 25/25 majority present. The Clery close states the incident may pose a serious or continuing threat to the campus community.

  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. present: The Clery close says the incident may pose a serious or continuing threat to the campus community.
  2. present: Serious or continuing threat is explicit severity language beyond the peeping label.
  3. present: May pose a serious or continuing threat states how grave the campus risk is.
  4. present: The footer frames a serious or continuing threat to the campus community, a consequence cue.
  5. present: Serious threat wording in the Clery sentence conveys severity, not merely the crime name.
  6. present: An incident that may pose a serious or continuing threat states potential harm to the community.
  7. present: Continuing threat language tells readers the peeping is treated as an ongoing danger.
  8. present: Serious or continuing threat is the impact phrase, separate from looking into windows.
  9. present: The Clery Act close reports a threat that may be serious or continuing for the campus.
  10. present: Serious or continuing threat to the campus community is stated harm-level language.
  11. present: May pose a serious threat is consequence wording, not just the peeping description.
  12. present: The notice is issued because the incident may pose a serious or continuing threat.
  13. present: Serious or continuing threat is the severity clause the Clery footer adds.
  14. present: A serious or continuing threat to the campus community states what the hazard could mean.
  15. present: Serious or continuing threat is not the hazard name; it is a stated severity of risk.
  16. present: The Jeanne Clery sentence says the incident may pose a serious or continuing threat.
  17. present: Serious or continuing threat to the campus community is impact language, not the peeping name.
  18. present: May pose a serious or continuing threat is the consequence clause that satisfies Impact.
  19. present: Serious or continuing threat is severity, which the Impact rubric asks for.
  20. present: The close does not stop at naming peeping; it adds serious or continuing threat.
  21. present: Serious or continuing threat to the campus community is explicit impact wording.
  22. present: We are issuing this notice to report an incident that may pose a serious threat.
  23. present: Serious or continuing threat is campus-harm language, not a restatement of peeping.
  24. present: The Clery compliance paragraph states a serious or continuing threat, which is impact.
  25. present: Serious or continuing threat to the campus community is the stated severity of consequence.