Burglary at Sigma Chi Fraternity

To check this alert, Claude Opus 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

  Present, 25 of 25. The message ends "Issued by Susan Fuller-DeAmato, Crime Analyst, MIT Police Department," leaving the issuing authority explicit.

  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: Authority is shown by the "MIT Police Department" sign off and by "MIT Police are investigating".
  2. present: The "Issued by" block names the MIT Police Department crime analyst as sender.
  3. present: The closing block names the MIT Police Department crime analyst as the issuer.
  4. present: The notice ends with the MIT Police Department and a named crime analyst as issuer.
  5. present: The notice ends with the MIT Police Department crime analyst's name and phone number.
  6. present: MIT Police are named throughout and the notice ends "Susan Fuller-DeAmato, Crime Analyst, MIT Police Department".
  7. present: The MIT Police Department and a named crime analyst appear in the closing signature block.
  8. present: Signed by "Susan Fuller-DeAmato, Crime Analyst, MIT Police Department", so the sender is clear.
  9. present: The MIT Police Department is identified as investigating and signs off through its Crime Analyst.
  10. present: It closes with "MIT Police Department" and a named crime analyst as issuer.
  11. present: Sender is identified as the MIT Police Department via crime analyst Susan Fuller-DeAmato.
  12. present: It ends with the MIT Police Department crime analyst's name and departmental phone number.
  13. present: The message closes with the MIT Police Department crime analyst as the named issuer.
  14. present: The message closes with the MIT Police Department crime analyst as issuer.
  15. present: Signed by the MIT Police Department crime analyst, so the issuing agency is explicit.
  16. present: Signed "Susan Fuller-DeAmato, Crime Analyst, MIT Police Department", a clear identification of the sender.
  17. present: The message is issued by the MIT Police Department through its crime analyst.
  18. present: Issued by a named Crime Analyst with "MIT Police Department" printed at the foot.
  19. present: Issued by a named MIT Police Department crime analyst, so the authority behind the message is explicit.
  20. present: The notice ends with MIT Police Department and the crime analyst's name, identifying the authority.
  21. present: The message closes with the MIT Police Department crime analyst as the named issuer.
  22. present: The notice is signed by a Crime Analyst of the "MIT Police Department" with a contact number.
  23. present: Issued by a named MIT Police crime analyst, so the sending authority is explicit.
  24. present: The closing block names the MIT Police Department crime analyst as issuer.
  25. present: The notice closes with the MIT Police Department and a named crime analyst.
• Hazardpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  Present, 25 of 25. The fraternity "was burglarized": items were "stacked up against the inside door," "boxes had been ransacked through" and "a mountain bike was reported stolen."

  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: It says the fraternity "was burglarized" with boxes ransacked and a mountain bike stolen.
  2. present: States the fraternity "was burglarized", with boxes ransacked and a mountain bike stolen.
  3. present: Reports the fraternity "was burglarized", with ransacked boxes and a stolen mountain bike.
  4. present: It states the fraternity "was burglarized," with boxes ransacked and a mountain bike stolen.
  5. present: It describes a burglary where the basement was ransacked and a mountain bike was stolen.
  6. present: It states the fraternity "was burglarized", with boxes ransacked and a mountain bike stolen.
  7. present: States Sigma Chi "was burglarized", with ransacked boxes and a stolen mountain bike.
  8. present: Reports the fraternity "was burglarized", with boxes ransacked and a mountain bike stolen.
  9. present: It reports the fraternity "was burglarized", with boxes ransacked and a mountain bike stolen.
  10. present: The fraternity "was burglarized", with ransacked boxes and a stolen mountain bike.
  11. present: It reports the fraternity "was burglarized", with boxes ransacked and a mountain bike stolen.
  12. present: A burglary is named, with a basement ransacked and a mountain bike reported stolen.
  13. present: The hazard is a burglary in which boxes were ransacked and "a mountain bike was reported stolen".
  14. present: It names a burglary in which boxes were ransacked and "a mountain bike was reported stolen".
  15. present: Reports the fraternity "was burglarized", with boxes ransacked and a mountain bike stolen.
  16. present: It reports the fraternity "was burglarized", with boxes ransacked and a mountain bike stolen.
  17. present: A burglary is named: boxes ransacked and "a mountain bike was reported stolen".
  18. present: The text reports the fraternity "was burglarized", with boxes ransacked and a mountain bike stolen.
  19. present: It names a burglary in which a basement was ransacked and a mountain bike taken.
  20. present: It states the fraternity "was burglarized," boxes were ransacked and a mountain bike was stolen.
  21. present: It reports Sigma Chi was "burglarized", with a ransacked basement and a stolen mountain bike.
  22. present: A burglary is named: boxes "ransacked through" and "a mountain bike was reported stolen".
  23. present: Reports the fraternity "was burglarized", with boxes ransacked and a mountain bike stolen.
  24. present: A fraternity "was burglarized", boxes ransacked and a mountain bike stolen, a concrete crime.
  25. present: It states Sigma Chi "was burglarized," with boxes ransacked and a mountain bike stolen.
• Locationpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  Present, 25 of 25. The address is spelled out as "Sigma Chi fraternity, which is located at 532 Beacon Street, Boston," with the basement identified as the scene.

  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: It gives "Sigma Chi fraternity, which is located at 532 Beacon Street, Boston", including the basement.
  2. present: Gives "Sigma Chi fraternity, which is located at 532 Beacon Street, Boston".
  3. present: Specifies "Sigma Chi fraternity, which is located at 532 Beacon Street, Boston".
  4. present: Sigma Chi at "532 Beacon Street, Boston" is a specific street address.
  5. present: It names "Sigma Chi fraternity, which is located at 532 Beacon Street, Boston."
  6. present: It places the event at "Sigma Chi fraternity, which is located at 532 Beacon Street, Boston".
  7. present: Gives "532 Beacon Street, Boston" as the fraternity's address.
  8. present: Gives "Sigma Chi fraternity, which is located at 532 Beacon Street, Boston".
  9. present: Location is given as "Sigma Chi fraternity, which is located at 532 Beacon Street, Boston".
  10. present: It gives "Sigma Chi fraternity, which is located at 532 Beacon Street, Boston".
  11. present: It gives "Sigma Chi fraternity, which is located at 532 Beacon Street, Boston".
  12. present: The address "532 Beacon Street, Boston" and the fraternity house name pin the site.
  13. present: It names "Sigma Chi fraternity, which is located at 532 Beacon Street, Boston".
  14. present: The address "Sigma Chi fraternity, which is located at 532 Beacon Street, Boston" is given.
  15. present: Identifies "Sigma Chi fraternity, which is located at 532 Beacon Street, Boston".
  16. present: The place is stated as "Sigma Chi fraternity, which is located at 532 Beacon Street, Boston".
  17. present: It names Sigma Chi fraternity "located at 532 Beacon Street, Boston" as the site.
  18. present: Address given: "Sigma Chi fraternity, which is located at 532 Beacon Street, Boston".
  19. present: The scene is "Sigma Chi fraternity, which is located at 532 Beacon Street, Boston".
  20. present: Location given as "Sigma Chi fraternity, which is located at 532 Beacon Street, Boston."
  21. present: The location given is "Sigma Chi fraternity, which is located at 532 Beacon Street, Boston".
  22. present: It names "Sigma Chi fraternity, which is located at 532 Beacon Street, Boston".
  23. present: Gives "Sigma Chi fraternity, which is located at 532 Beacon Street, Boston".
  24. present: It gives "Sigma Chi fraternity, which is located at 532 Beacon Street, Boston".
  25. present: It names "Sigma Chi fraternity, which is located at 532 Beacon Street, Boston."
• Guidancepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  Present, 25 of 25. Tips instruct readers to "ALWAYS lock your doors and windows," avoid propping doors, and "Call the MIT Police immediately at 617-253-1212."

  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: Readers are told not to prop doors open, to lock doors and windows, and to report tailgaters.
  2. present: Tells readers to lock doors and windows and call MIT Police immediately if watchful.
  3. present: Urges readers to lock doors and windows, not prop doors, and call MIT Police immediately.
  4. present: Protective instructions include "don't prop doors open" and calling MIT Police when something looks wrong.
  5. present: Tips instruct readers to lock doors and windows and to call MIT Police when they see something.
  6. present: Protective instructions include locking doors and windows and calling MIT Police immediately when something seems wrong.
  7. present: Tells readers to always lock doors and windows and to call MIT Police immediately.
  8. present: Urges readers to lock doors and windows, not prop doors, and call MIT Police immediately.
  9. present: Protective steps are listed: lock doors and windows, do not prop doors, call MIT Police immediately.
  10. present: The tips instruct readers not to prop doors open and to lock doors and windows.
  11. present: Protective steps are given: lock doors and windows, do not prop doors, report tailgaters.
  12. present: Readers are urged to lock doors and windows and not to prop doors open.
  13. present: Protective steps are given: lock doors and windows, do not prop doors, call police immediately.
  14. present: It instructs the reader not to prop doors, to lock up, and to call MIT Police immediately.
  15. present: Advises recipients not to prop doors open and to call MIT Police immediately if watchful.
  16. present: Readers get protective instructions such as not propping doors and calling police immediately.
  17. present: Tips instruct readers to lock doors and windows and to call MIT Police immediately.
  18. present: It urges readers to always lock doors and windows and to call the MIT Police when watchful.
  19. present: Readers are urged not to prop doors, to lock up, and to call police when they see something.
  20. present: It tells readers to always lock doors and windows and to call MIT Police when they see something.
  21. present: Advice to lock doors and windows, not prop doors, and call police gives recipients concrete actions.
  22. present: Readers are told to lock doors and windows, avoid propping doors, and report tailgaters.
  23. present: Advises locking doors and windows and calling MIT Police when something looks wrong.
  24. present: It tells the reader not to prop doors, to lock up, and to call MIT Police when watchful.
  25. present: Readers are told to lock doors and windows, not prop doors, and call the MIT Police.
• Timepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  Present, 25 of 25. Timing is given as "Monday, August 28, 2017 sometime between 1:30AM and 8:40AM," an explicit overnight window.

  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: It supplies "Monday, August 28, 2017 sometime between 1:30AM and 8:40AM".
  2. present: Provides "Monday, August 28, 2017 sometime between 1:30AM and 8:40AM".
  3. present: Says "Monday, August 28, 2017 sometime between 1:30AM and 8:40AM".
  4. present: The window "Monday, August 28, 2017 sometime between 1:30AM and 8:40AM" is explicit.
  5. present: The incident window is "Monday, August 28, 2017 sometime between 1:30AM and 8:40AM."
  6. present: The window "Monday, August 28, 2017 sometime between 1:30AM and 8:40AM" supplies date and clock times.
  7. present: Windows the crime to "Monday, August 28, 2017 sometime between 1:30AM and 8:40AM".
  8. present: Specifies "Monday, August 28, 2017 sometime between 1:30AM and 8:40AM".
  9. present: The window is stated: "on Monday, August 28, 2017 sometime between 1:30AM and 8:40AM".
  10. present: The window "Monday, August 28, 2017 sometime between 1:30AM and 8:40AM" supplies date and clock times.
  11. present: It states "Monday, August 28, 2017 sometime between 1:30AM and 8:40AM".
  12. present: The window "Monday, August 28, 2017 sometime between 1:30AM and 8:40AM" supplies timing.
  13. present: The window is "Monday, August 28, 2017 sometime between 1:30AM and 8:40AM".
  14. present: The interval "Monday, August 28, 2017 sometime between 1:30AM and 8:40AM" appears.
  15. present: Notes "Monday, August 28, 2017 sometime between 1:30AM and 8:40AM".
  16. present: It says the burglary happened "Monday, August 28, 2017 sometime between 1:30AM and 8:40AM".
  17. present: It specifies "Monday, August 28, 2017 sometime between 1:30AM and 8:40AM".
  18. present: The window "Monday, August 28, 2017 sometime between 1:30AM and 8:40AM" is explicit.
  19. present: It states "Monday, August 28, 2017 sometime between 1:30AM and 8:40AM".
  20. present: The window is "Monday, August 28, 2017 sometime between 1:30AM and 8:40AM."
  21. present: It specifies "Monday, August 28, 2017 sometime between 1:30AM and 8:40AM" for the offense.
  22. present: The window "between 1:30AM and 8:40AM" on August 28, 2017 supplies timing.
  23. present: Dates it "Monday, August 28, 2017 sometime between 1:30AM and 8:40AM".
  24. present: The window "Monday, August 28, 2017 sometime between 1:30AM and 8:40AM" supplies timing.
  25. present: It specifies "Monday, August 28, 2017 sometime between 1:30AM and 8:40AM."
• Impactabsent1/25

  Final assessment

  Absent, 1 of 25. The notice records a ransacked basement and one stolen bike but never states what the threat could do to readers going forward, so the lone present vote stands apart.

  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: Nothing describes risk to persons or any severity of outcome from the burglary.
  2. absent: No stated or implied consequence of the hazard beyond the loss already described.
  3. absent: No consequence or severity is expressed; only property loss and unknown entry method are noted.
  4. absent: Although entry was forced, nothing states any risk to residents or worse outcomes.
  5. absent: No harm or severity is conveyed; the account stops at the missing bicycle.
  6. absent: The notice conveys no consequence or danger level, only that entry was made and a bike taken.
  7. absent: No harm, danger or severity is asserted anywhere in the text.
  8. absent: The text never says the situation was dangerous or describes any potential harm.
  9. absent: Nothing conveys potential harm or severity; the loss of a bicycle is reported without any risk framing.
  10. absent: No potential harm or severity is expressed, the notice stays factual about missing property.
  11. absent: No harm, injury or severity is conveyed, only an unresolved property crime.
  12. absent: The write-up stops at what was taken and never states any risk or consequence to people.
  13. present: Stolen property is the stated harm, and the tips aim at protecting belongings from further theft.
  14. absent: No statement of what could happen to a person, only property already taken.
  15. absent: No statement of danger, injury risk, or seriousness accompanies the account of the break in.
  16. absent: The notice offers no statement of how dangerous or costly the hazard could be.
  17. absent: No harm, injury risk or severity is stated, only that property was taken.
  18. absent: Nothing conveys risk to persons or severity, only that items were rifled and one bike taken.
  19. absent: The message reports what was taken without describing any threat to safety or severity of risk.
  20. absent: No statement of potential harm or severity appears, only an account of what was taken.
  21. absent: Nothing conveys what the burglar could do to people or how serious the exposure is.
  22. absent: No statement of danger or consequence appears, only the loss of a bicycle as fact.
  23. absent: Says nothing about danger to persons or how serious the outcome could be.
  24. absent: Nothing describes potential harm or seriousness; the blocked basement door is narrative, not a consequence claim.
  25. absent: Nothing conveys potential injury, danger or severity beyond the fact of the theft.