Power outage affecting most of campus; later restored

To check this alert, Claude (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 MIT Alert is a branded campus signature that identifies the sender.

  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: MIT Alert branded signature identifies the sender at the start.
  2. present: Source is the MIT Alert tag on the first-burst line.
  3. present: MIT Alert is a campus emergency brand that counts as source.
  4. present: The message opens with MIT Alert, naming the alert system.
  5. present: Branded MIT Alert channel identifies who is sending.
  6. present: Source present via the MIT Alert prefix.
  7. present: MIT Alert functions as a recognized institutional alert signature.
  8. present: Sender is marked by the MIT Alert label.
  9. present: Clear source from the MIT Alert header.
  10. present: Institutional alert brand MIT Alert satisfies source.
  11. present: The opening MIT Alert tag names the sending system.
  12. present: MIT Alert branding identifies MIT as the origin of the notice.
  13. present: Source cue is the MIT Alert product name.
  14. present: Who is sending: MIT Alert (campus alert brand).
  15. present: The text is stamped MIT Alert as the issuer label.
  16. present: MIT Alert is the clear source brand on the message.
  17. present: Branded signature MIT Alert establishes source.
  18. present: Source element met by MIT Alert at the start.
  19. present: The alert system name MIT Alert identifies the sender.
  20. present: MIT Alert prefix is present as source identification.
  21. present: Campus brand MIT Alert marks the institutional source.
  22. present: Source is MIT Alert, the official MIT emergency channel label.
  23. present: Opening brand MIT Alert satisfies the source criterion.
  24. present: MIT Alert is named as the alerting product and sender.
  25. present: The message carries the MIT Alert source tag.
• Hazardpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  Unanimous present: power outage is a specific named hazard, not a vague 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: Hazard is a power outage affecting most of campus.
  2. present: Power outage is a specific utility failure, not a vague emergency.
  3. present: The threat is named as a power outage.
  4. present: A power outage occurred is explicit hazard language.
  5. present: Specific hazard: campus power outage.
  6. present: Power outage is the concrete problem described.
  7. present: Hazard present because power outage is a named incident type.
  8. present: What is wrong is loss of power on campus.
  9. present: The alert labels the event a power outage.
  10. present: Named threat is power outage across most of campus.
  11. present: Power outage is the hazard phrase in the body.
  12. present: A utility outage (power) is a specific hazard.
  13. present: The message concerns a power outage, not only an incident.
  14. present: Hazard is power outage, stated up front after the brand.
  15. present: Specific threat language: power outage occurred.
  16. present: The outage type power is named clearly.
  17. present: Names power outage rather than a bare emergency.
  18. present: Hazard wording is power outage on campus.
  19. present: Power outage is the clear hazard type.
  20. present: A named electrical outage is the hazard.
  21. present: Hazard present: power outage affecting campus.
  22. present: The threat is not generic; power outage is called out.
  23. present: Incident type is power outage, a specific hazard label.
  24. present: Power outage names what is happening.
  25. present: Power outage is the hazard named in the MIT Alert.
• Locationpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  Unanimous agreement that most of campus is a valid place reference for the outage.

  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: Location is most of campus, a place scope for the outage.
  2. present: Campus is named as where the power outage occurred.
  3. present: Affected most of campus supplies a location frame.
  4. present: Where: most of campus under MIT Alert.
  5. present: Campus is a valid location under the coding rules.
  6. present: Location present: most of campus is the affected area.
  7. present: The outage is situated on campus (most of it).
  8. present: Campus-wide scope language marks the place.
  9. present: Geographic detail is campus as the outage setting.
  10. present: The text names campus as the location of the outage.
  11. present: Most of campus is the stated where.
  12. present: Location includes campus as the affected place.
  13. present: Place is campus under the MIT emergency channel.
  14. present: Readers are told most of campus lost power.
  15. present: Location element met by campus place naming.
  16. present: Campus is a concrete place reference for the outage.
  17. present: The event is localized to campus buildings broadly.
  18. present: On-campus scope is given for the power failure.
  19. present: Where it happened: most of campus.
  20. present: Named place campus supplies the location element.
  21. present: Most of campus fixes the geographic scope.
  22. present: The alert places the outage on campus.
  23. present: Campus is the location of the power problem.
  24. present: Location is campus (most of it) for this outage.
  25. present: Geographic site is campus as stated in the body.
• Guidancepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  Unanimous present: if you have an emergency or safety concern, call MIT Police at 617-253-1212 is protective contact 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. present: If you have an emergency or safety concern, call MIT Police is guidance.
  2. present: Guidance directs emergencies to MIT Police at 617-253-1212.
  3. present: Recipients are told to call MIT Police for emergency or safety concerns.
  4. present: Protective instruction: contact MIT Police at the listed number.
  5. present: Call MIT Police at 617-253-1212 is an explicit action for emergencies.
  6. present: The alert gives a police contact path for people with safety concerns.
  7. present: Guidance present: call MIT Police if emergency or safety concern.
  8. present: Emergency callers receive MIT Police phone instructions.
  9. present: If you have an emergency is a conditional protective instruction.
  10. present: The message tells people who to call for emergencies during the outage.
  11. present: MIT Police number is provided as the action for safety concerns.
  12. present: Protective guidance is the call-MIT-Police clause.
  13. present: Guidance tells people what to do if they have an emergency.
  14. present: Contact MIT Police is a concrete recipient action.
  15. present: The alert instructs use of MIT Police for emergencies and safety concerns.
  16. present: Call MIT Police supplies protective next-step guidance.
  17. present: Guidance element met by emergency contact instructions.
  18. present: Safety-concern callers are directed to MIT Police at 617-253-1212.
  19. present: The message directs emergency behavior to a named police unit.
  20. present: Police contact instruction is actionable guidance for recipients.
  21. present: If emergency or safety concern, call MIT Police is clear guidance.
  22. present: Protective steps are the MIT Police call path for emergencies.
  23. present: Guidance is present: call MIT Police for emergency or safety issues.
  24. present: Recipients get a concrete phone action for emergencies.
  25. present: The alert tells people to call MIT Police when they have safety concerns.
• Timeabsent0/25

  Final assessment

  All reads find no clock time, date, or recency cue such as now or immediately.

  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. absent: No clock time, date, or recency word such as now appears.
  2. absent: Body text lacks any timing or immediacy cue.
  3. absent: Nothing indicates when the outage began or how current it is.
  4. absent: Clock or date references are not in the text.
  5. absent: Absent any AM/PM time or until-further-notice phrase.
  6. absent: Temporal detail is missing from the short alert body.
  7. absent: No time-of-day or now/immediately marker is present.
  8. absent: When this is happening is not stated in words.
  9. absent: No timestamp or immediacy language appears.
  10. absent: Text never gives a time window or clock reading.
  11. absent: Lacks recency words such as ongoing or as of a time.
  12. absent: Time element is not satisfied by any phrase here.
  13. absent: Nothing like immediately or today appears.
  14. absent: The alert does not convey timing or recency.
  15. absent: Absent any temporal reference in the body.
  16. absent: No date, clock time, or duration language is included.
  17. absent: Temporal cues are missing entirely from this notice.
  18. absent: Nothing indicates when the outage started or ends.
  19. absent: Date, clock time, or immediate or until phrasing is not used.
  20. absent: The text lacks any timing or duration language.
  21. absent: No clock time or recency cue such as now is present.
  22. absent: Time of occurrence is not stated.
  23. absent: No temporal marker appears in the MIT Alert body.
  24. absent: When is not answered by any time language.
  25. absent: The message omits all time and recency cues.
• Impactabsent2/25

  Final assessment

  Majority absent (23 of 25): Facilities is investigating impacts does not state consequences, and no severity language appears. A few treat most of campus as scale impact.

  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: Facilities is investigating impacts does not state what those impacts are.
  2. absent: No injuries, damage severity, or named consequences are described.
  3. absent: Impact language is prospective investigation only, not stated effects.
  4. absent: Affected most of campus describes scope, not harm severity beyond the outage.
  5. present: Affected most of campus can be read as a large-scale impact statement.
  6. absent: No consequence clause such as dangerous or life-threatening is used.
  7. absent: Investigating impacts acknowledges possible effects without stating them.
  8. absent: Impact is absent as an explicit severity or outcome statement.
  9. absent: The text stops at the outage fact plus an investigation note.
  10. absent: Nothing says the outage is hazardous beyond loss of power itself.
  11. absent: Impact element is not separately conveyed with severity wording.
  12. absent: No line about injuries, building damage, or secondary harm appears.
  13. absent: Consequences remain unstated while Facilities investigates.
  14. absent: Does not characterize expected effects on people beyond the outage name.
  15. absent: Severity language is missing from this short utility alert.
  16. present: Campus-wide effect (most of campus) implies substantial operational impact.
  17. absent: The alert never states what harm the outage is causing.
  18. absent: Impact absent: no deadly, damaging, or injury-risk clause.
  19. absent: Naming power outage alone does not satisfy impact under the rubric.
  20. absent: No secondary effects or severity metrics are described.
  21. absent: Text does not convey what the hazard could do beyond the outage itself.
  22. absent: Investigating impacts is not the same as reporting impacts.
  23. absent: What the outage is doing to people or property is not said.
  24. absent: Impact is not present as an explicit consequence statement.
  25. absent: No injuries, shutdowns of specific life-safety systems, or similar are listed.