Campus police activity with street closures at 23rd and Scarff

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. Police are identified as the acting agency by "There is police activity", which the reads accepted as source attribution.

  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: Police are named as the agency whose activity prompted the notice.
  2. present: The responding authority is implied by "police activity" and the street closures they imposed.
  3. present: Police are named as the agency whose activity prompted the notice.
  4. present: Police are named as the responding agency through the phrase "police activity."
  5. present: Police are identified as the agency whose activity prompted this notice.
  6. present: Police are named as the agency whose activity prompted this notice.
  7. present: The reference to police conducting activity and closures identifies the responding agency.
  8. present: Police are identified as the agency whose activity prompted the notice.
  9. present: Police are identified as the agency whose activity prompted the notice.
  10. present: Police are identified as the agency conducting the activity being reported.
  11. present: Police are named as the agency whose activity prompted this notice.
  12. present: Police are identified as the agency whose activity prompted the message.
  13. present: Police are named as the agency whose activity is underway, identifying the responder.
  14. present: Police are named as the agency whose activity prompted the message.
  15. present: Police are named as the agency whose activity prompted this notice.
  16. present: Police are named as the agency whose activity is underway, identifying the responding authority.
  17. present: The notice attributes the activity to police, the responding agency.
  18. present: The responding agency appears as "police activity", attributing the situation to police.
  19. present: The responding agency is identified only as "police", which still names an authority.
  20. present: Police are named as the acting authority through the reference to "police activity".
  21. present: The responding authority is implied by "police activity" and the announced street closures.
  22. present: Police are named as the agency whose activity prompted the notice.
  23. present: The reference to "police activity" and named street closures points to police as the acting authority.
  24. present: Police are named as the acting authority through the phrase "police activity".
  25. present: Police are identified as the agency whose activity prompts the notice.
• Hazardabsent0/25

  Final assessment

  Absent, 0 of 25. No hazard is named; the text reports activity and street closures, then states "no immediate threat exists".

  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. absent: No specific threat is named and the text says no immediate threat exists.
  2. absent: No specific threat is named, and the alert states "no immediate threat exists".
  3. absent: Only "police activity" and street closures are described, with no specific threat named.
  4. absent: No hazard is specified; the text says only "police activity" and denies any immediate threat.
  5. absent: Only "police activity" is given, which names no particular hazard.
  6. absent: "police activity" plus street closures describes a response, not a specific named threat.
  7. absent: Only unspecified "police activity" is described, and the threat is expressly denied.
  8. absent: Only "police activity" and street closures are described, with no threat named.
  9. absent: Only "police activity" and street closures are described, with no threat named.
  10. absent: No specific hazard is named, just unspecified police activity with no threat.
  11. absent: Only unspecified "police activity" is given, with an express statement of no immediate threat.
  12. absent: Only generic "police activity" is given, with no named hazard behind it.
  13. absent: Only unspecified "police activity" is mentioned, with an explicit statement of no immediate threat.
  14. absent: Only unspecified "police activity" is cited, with no actual threat named.
  15. absent: Only "police activity" and street closures are described; no specific threat is named.
  16. absent: Only "police activity" is described, with the specific underlying threat never named.
  17. absent: Only "police activity" is given, which does not identify an actual threat.
  18. absent: Only "police activity" and street closures are described, with no specific threat named.
  19. absent: Nothing beyond unspecified "police activity" is named, so the threat type is unstated.
  20. absent: The text describes activity and closures but never names an actual hazard.
  21. absent: Only "police activity" is described, a generic activity rather than a named threat.
  22. absent: Only "police activity" is described; the underlying hazard is never specified.
  23. absent: No hazard is named, only unspecified police activity and closures.
  24. absent: Only "police activity" is described, with an explicit statement that no threat exists.
  25. absent: Only "police activity" is cited, with the message expressly saying no immediate threat exists.
• Locationpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  Present, 25 of 25. Location is unusually detailed: "23rd Street and Scarff Street" plus closures from Oak to Norwood and Scarff to Saint James Park West at UPC.

  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 lists 23rd and Scarff Street plus the closed street segments at UPC.
  2. present: It lists "23rd Street and Scarff Street" plus bounded closures at UPC.
  3. present: It names "23rd Street and Scarff Street" plus the closed block limits at UPC.
  4. present: Streets and closures are listed, including "23rd Street and Scarff Street" at UPC.
  5. present: It names "23rd Street and Scarff Street" plus specific street closures.
  6. present: It names 23rd and Scarff Streets and the closure limits at UPC.
  7. present: It lists "23rd Street and Scarff Street" plus closure limits at UPC.
  8. present: It lists 23rd and Scarff Streets and the closure limits at UPC.
  9. present: It lists "23rd Street and Scarff Street" plus specific closure limits at UPC.
  10. present: It names 23rd and Scarff Streets plus detailed street closure boundaries.
  11. present: It lists "23rd Street and Scarff Street" plus the closed blocks at UPC.
  12. present: It names "23rd Street and Scarff Street" plus the closed blocks at UPC.
  13. present: It names 23rd and Scarff Street plus the closed blocks from Oak to Norwood.
  14. present: It names 23rd and Scarff Streets plus the closed blocks at UPC.
  15. present: It lists "23rd Street and Scarff Street" plus bounded closures at UPC.
  16. present: It lists "23rd Street and Scarff Street" plus detailed street closures at UPC.
  17. present: It names 23rd and Scarff plus specific closed street segments.
  18. present: It lists "23rd Street and Scarff Street" and several closed blocks at UPC.
  19. present: It lists "23rd Street and Scarff Street" plus specific closed street segments.
  20. present: It lists "23rd Street and Scarff Street" plus specific closed street segments at UPC.
  21. present: It lists "23rd Street and Scarff Street" plus specific closure boundaries.
  22. present: It lists 23rd and Scarff Streets plus specific closure segments at UPC.
  23. present: It lists "23rd Street and Scarff Street" plus a detailed closure perimeter at UPC.
  24. present: It names 23rd and Scarff plus the closed blocks from Oak to Norwood at UPC.
  25. present: It names 23rd and Scarff Streets plus specific closure limits at UPC.
• Guidancepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  Present, 25 of 25. Recipients are told "Please stay away from the area.", a protective instruction reinforced by the listed closures.

  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 instructed to "stay away from the area".
  2. present: Recipients are told "Please stay away from the area".
  3. present: Recipients are asked to "stay away from the area", a clear protective action.
  4. present: The closing line asks recipients to "stay away from the area."
  5. present: Recipients are asked to "stay away from the area."
  6. present: Recipients are instructed to "stay away from the area."
  7. present: Recipients are told to "stay away from the area".
  8. present: The closing line directs readers to "stay away from the area".
  9. present: The closing line directs recipients to "stay away from the area".
  10. present: The closing line directs people to stay away from the area.
  11. present: Recipients are told "Please stay away from the area".
  12. present: The closing line tells people to "stay away from the area".
  13. present: Readers are told to "stay away from the area", a protective action.
  14. present: The closing line directs readers to "stay away from the area."
  15. present: The closing line tells readers to "stay away from the area".
  16. present: The closing line directs readers to "stay away from the area".
  17. present: Recipients are told to "stay away from the area".
  18. present: Readers are directed to "stay away from the area", a clear avoidance instruction.
  19. present: Readers are asked to "stay away from the area", a clear protective instruction.
  20. present: Recipients are told to "stay away from the area", a protective action.
  21. present: The closing line directs people to "stay away from the area."
  22. present: Recipients are instructed to "stay away from the area".
  23. present: The closing line tells recipients to "stay away from the area".
  24. present: Recipients are told "Please stay away from the area", a clear protective instruction.
  25. present: The instruction "Please stay away from the area" is a protective action.
• Timeabsent0/25

  Final assessment

  Absent, 0 of 25. Nothing gives a date, time, or duration for the closures, so the when question goes unanswered in this notice.

  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 time reference, date, or word like "now" is present.
  2. absent: Nothing conveys timing or recency of the police activity.
  3. absent: The message gives no time reference, date, or recency marker.
  4. absent: There is no time stamp, date, or recency phrase in the message.
  5. absent: Nothing indicates when this began or how recent it is.
  6. absent: No time stamp or recency marker is given for the activity.
  7. absent: No clock time, date, or word like now situates the event in time.
  8. absent: Nothing indicates when this is happening or how recent it is.
  9. absent: No time stamp or recency phrase accompanies the street closure information.
  10. absent: Nothing indicates when this is occurring or how recent it is.
  11. absent: No time stamp or recency phrase accompanies the closure information.
  12. absent: Nothing in the text says when this is happening or how recent it is.
  13. absent: Nothing in the text indicates when this is happening.
  14. absent: No time stamp or word indicating when this is happening is present.
  15. absent: Nothing indicates when this occurred or how recent it is.
  16. absent: No time, date, or recency marker such as "currently" appears.
  17. absent: No time reference such as a clock time or "now" is included.
  18. absent: The text carries no time stamp or recency marker of any kind.
  19. absent: There is no clock time or recency marker in the notice.
  20. absent: No time stamp or recency marker such as "now" appears.
  21. absent: No clock time, date, or word like "now" fixes the timing.
  22. absent: No time reference such as a clock time or "now" is present.
  23. absent: No clock time, date, or word like "now" appears in the notice.
  24. absent: Street closures are listed with no time, date, or duration attached.
  25. absent: Nothing conveys when this began or how recent it is.
• Impactabsent0/25

  Final assessment

  Absent, 0 of 25. The message states "no immediate threat exists", explicitly ruling out consequences rather than describing any severity.

  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: The message asserts no threat, giving no consequence or severity.
  2. absent: The message denies rather than describes potential harm to the reader.
  3. absent: The text states "no immediate threat exists", conveying no potential harm.
  4. absent: The alert states "no immediate threat exists," conveying no potential harm.
  5. absent: The text explicitly says "no immediate threat exists", conveying no consequence.
  6. absent: The text says "no immediate threat exists," conveying no potential harm.
  7. absent: The message states "no immediate threat exists", conveying no consequence.
  8. absent: It states "no immediate threat exists", conveying no potential harm.
  9. absent: The message says "no immediate threat exists", conveying no potential harm.
  10. absent: The alert explicitly states no immediate threat exists, conveying no consequence.
  11. absent: No harm or severity is conveyed; the text says no immediate threat exists.
  12. absent: The message states "no immediate threat exists" and describes no potential harm.
  13. absent: The message states no threat exists and describes no possible harm.
  14. absent: Consequences are ruled out rather than stated: "no immediate threat exists."
  15. absent: The message states "no immediate threat exists", conveying no harm or severity.
  16. absent: The message states "no immediate threat exists", so no harm or severity is conveyed.
  17. absent: The text states "no immediate threat exists" and offers no severity.
  18. absent: The phrase "no immediate threat exists" rules out any severity statement.
  19. absent: It explicitly says "no immediate threat exists", conveying no potential harm.
  20. absent: Severity is negated rather than stated: "no immediate threat exists".
  21. absent: The alert states "no immediate threat exists", conveying no harm or severity.
  22. absent: It states "no immediate threat exists", so no consequence or severity is conveyed.
  23. absent: It explicitly states "no immediate threat exists", conveying no consequence.
  24. absent: The message states "no immediate threat exists", conveying no potential harm.
  25. absent: No severity or harm is described; the notice states there is no threat.