Campus police activity at 23rd St and Union Ave

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. "There is police activity" attributes the situation to police, the only agency this two sentence message names.

  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 mention of police activity identifies the responding law enforcement agency.
  2. present: The mention of police activity supplies the responding agency as the source.
  3. present: The mention of police activity points to police as the responding agency.
  4. present: "police activity" points to police as the responding agency issuing the notice.
  5. present: Police are named as the agency active at the scene, supplying a source.
  6. present: Police are identified as the agency conducting the activity described.
  7. present: Police are named as the actors in the reported activity, identifying the authority.
  8. present: Mention of "police activity" identifies police as the acting authority.
  9. present: Mention of "police activity" points to police as the responding agency.
  10. present: Police are named as the acting authority in the reported activity.
  11. present: Reference to "police activity" supplies police as the responding authority.
  12. present: Police are named as the agency active at the scene, identifying the responding authority.
  13. present: Police are named as the acting agency, which serves as the responding authority.
  14. present: Police appear as the acting agency, supplying an identifiable authority.
  15. present: Police are identified as the agency operating at the scene.
  16. present: Reference to "police activity" identifies police as the responding authority behind the notice.
  17. present: The responding authority, police, is identified in the first clause.
  18. present: The message attributes the situation to police, a named responding authority.
  19. present: Police are named as the acting agency, which satisfies source identification.
  20. present: The reference to "police activity" identifies police as the authority involved.
  21. present: Police are named as the responders through the phrase "police activity".
  22. present: Police are identified as the agency active at the scene.
  23. present: Mention of "police activity" supplies the responding agency as the implied source.
  24. present: Police are identified as the authority on scene via "police activity".
  25. present: Police are named as the responders, supplying the issuing authority.
• Hazardabsent0/25

  Final assessment

  Absent, 0 of 25. Generic "police activity" is not a hazard, and the clause "but no immediate threat exists" removes any implied danger.

  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: Only generic "police activity" is described, with no threat named.
  2. absent: The alert names no specific hazard and explicitly reports no immediate threat.
  3. absent: "Police activity" is unspecific and the text denies any immediate threat.
  4. absent: The message names no specific threat and states no immediate threat exists.
  5. absent: "police activity" is generic wording that does not identify a threat.
  6. absent: "police activity" alone does not name a hazard, and no threat is asserted.
  7. absent: Unspecified police activity is not a named threat, and danger is disclaimed.
  8. absent: Police presence alone is not a named threat, and none is given.
  9. absent: The text names no hazard, only unspecified police presence with no threat.
  10. absent: The message gives no specific threat, only unspecified police activity.
  11. absent: No hazard is specified beyond generic police presence, and no threat is said to exist.
  12. absent: "police activity" alone does not name what the underlying threat is.
  13. absent: Only generic "police activity" appears, and the text disclaims any immediate threat.
  14. absent: Unspecified police activity is not a named hazard under the rubric.
  15. absent: The phrase "police activity" does not name any specific threat.
  16. absent: No specific hazard is named, only unspecified police activity.
  17. absent: The text names only police activity, not any particular hazard.
  18. absent: No specific threat is stated; police activity is a generic descriptor.
  19. absent: Only vague "police activity" is given, with no named threat.
  20. absent: No specific hazard is named; the message only cites unspecified police activity.
  21. absent: No hazard is specified, and the alert says there is no immediate threat.
  22. absent: "Police activity" does not name the actual threat, so the hazard is unstated.
  23. absent: Nothing specific is named as a threat; it is only unspecified activity.
  24. absent: The generic phrase "police activity" names no hazard and a threat is expressly denied.
  25. absent: "police activity" is generic and the alert says no immediate threat exists.
• Locationpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  Present, 25 of 25. The notice places the activity "in the area of 23rd St. and Union Ave.", a named intersection at the campus edge.

  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 intersection "23rd St. and Union Ave." gives the location.
  2. present: "23rd St. and Union Ave." identifies the affected intersection.
  3. present: The area of "23rd St. and Union Ave." is named as the place.
  4. present: The location is "the area of 23rd St. and Union Ave."
  5. present: The area is given as "23rd St. and Union Ave."
  6. present: The intersection "23rd St. and Union Ave." pinpoints the place.
  7. present: The area of "23rd St. and Union Ave." is given.
  8. present: The area of "23rd St. and Union Ave." is specified.
  9. present: It marks "23rd St. and Union Ave." as the area involved.
  10. present: The area of "23rd St. and Union Ave." is specified.
  11. present: The corner "23rd St. and Union Ave." locates the activity.
  12. present: The area of "23rd St. and Union Ave." gives a definite location.
  13. present: The area of "23rd St. and Union Ave." is given as the location.
  14. present: "23rd St. and Union Ave." locates the activity precisely.
  15. present: The location "23rd St. and Union Ave." is given explicitly.
  16. present: The location "23rd St. and Union Ave." is specified.
  17. present: "23rd St. and Union Ave." gives a specific intersection.
  18. present: "23rd St. and Union Ave." gives the location of the activity.
  19. present: The message locates events at "23rd St. and Union Ave."
  20. present: The area of "23rd St. and Union Ave." is given as the location.
  21. present: The site is given as "23rd St. and Union Ave."
  22. present: The location "23rd St. and Union Ave." is given.
  23. present: The location "23rd St. and Union Ave." is a named intersection.
  24. present: The area of "23rd St. and Union Ave." is given as the location.
  25. present: The area "23rd St. and Union Ave." is specified.
• Guidancepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  Present, 25 of 25. The closing sentence "Please stay away from the area." is an unambiguous protective instruction.

  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: Recipients are told to "stay away from the area".
  2. present: "Please stay away from the area" tells recipients what to do.
  3. present: The message directs readers to "stay away from the area".
  4. present: Recipients are told to "stay away from the area."
  5. present: It tells readers to "stay away from the area."
  6. present: It directs recipients to "stay away from the area."
  7. present: Readers are directed to "stay away from the area".
  8. present: It tells recipients to "stay away from the area".
  9. present: The request to "stay away from the area" is a protective action.
  10. present: The text asks readers to stay away from the area.
  11. present: It instructs readers to "stay away from the area".
  12. present: The line "Please stay away from the area" is a direct protective instruction.
  13. present: The message directs readers to "stay away from the area".
  14. present: Readers are told to "stay away from the area", a protective instruction.
  15. present: It asks readers to "stay away from the area".
  16. present: The message instructs recipients to "stay away from the area".
  17. present: Readers are directed to stay away from the area.
  18. present: "Please stay away from the area" instructs recipients in a protective action.
  19. present: It directs readers to "stay away from the area".
  20. present: "Please stay away from the area" is an explicit protective instruction.
  21. present: It asks people to "stay away from the area."
  22. present: "Please stay away from the area" directs recipient behavior.
  23. present: Recipients are told to "stay away from the area", a clear avoidance instruction.
  24. present: It instructs the community to "stay away from the area".
  25. present: Recipients are instructed to "stay away from the area".
• Timeabsent0/25

  Final assessment

  Absent, 0 of 25. This two sentence message contains no timestamp, date, or recency wording of any kind.

  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: The message carries no time stamp or recency wording.
  2. absent: Timing is left unstated, with no clock, date, or "now".
  3. absent: There is no clock time, date, or recency phrasing in the message.
  4. absent: No timing information of any kind is given.
  5. absent: The message carries no time, date, or immediacy cue.
  6. absent: No clock time, date, or recency phrasing appears.
  7. absent: No time reference of any kind appears.
  8. absent: No temporal cue of any kind is present in the sentence.
  9. absent: The alert carries no time reference of any kind.
  10. absent: There is no clock time, date, or word conveying recency.
  11. absent: No clock time, date, or recency marker is included.
  12. absent: The text carries no clock time, date, or recency marker.
  13. absent: No timing information of any kind is included.
  14. absent: No timing information of any kind is supplied.
  15. absent: No time reference of any kind is included.
  16. absent: Neither a time stamp nor a recency word is present.
  17. absent: No timing or recency wording appears in the short message.
  18. absent: There is no clock time, date, or recency term in the message.
  19. absent: Neither a clock time nor a recency cue like now appears.
  20. absent: The text carries no clock time or recency cue at all.
  21. absent: There is no time, date, or recency cue anywhere in the text.
  22. absent: Neither clock time nor recency language appears.
  23. absent: No time reference, date, or recency cue is present.
  24. absent: The message carries no time stamp or recency wording.
  25. absent: There is no clock time, date, or recency phrase.
• Impactabsent0/25

  Final assessment

  Absent, 0 of 25. Because the text says "no immediate threat exists", no potential harm or severity is conveyed to readers at all.

  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: No harm is implied since the text says no immediate threat exists.
  2. absent: Potential harm is disclaimed rather than described.
  3. absent: No harm or severity is described; the alert says there is no immediate threat.
  4. absent: Any potential consequence is denied rather than described.
  5. absent: Any consequence is denied outright: "no immediate threat exists."
  6. absent: The phrase "no immediate threat exists" rules out any stated consequence.
  7. absent: The phrase "no immediate threat exists" removes rather than conveys severity.
  8. absent: Any consequence is ruled out by "no immediate threat exists".
  9. absent: Severity is explicitly negated rather than described.
  10. absent: The phrase "no immediate threat exists" negates any impact statement.
  11. absent: The message states no immediate threat and gives no severity information.
  12. absent: Harm is disclaimed rather than described, since "no immediate threat exists".
  13. absent: No potential harm is described, and the alert says no threat exists.
  14. absent: Potential harm is denied, not described.
  15. absent: Severity is denied rather than conveyed, with "no immediate threat exists".
  16. absent: The phrase "no immediate threat exists" removes rather than conveys any impact.
  17. absent: Impact is absent since it explicitly reports no immediate threat.
  18. absent: The alert states no threat exists, so it conveys no harm or severity.
  19. absent: Any potential harm is denied by the phrase "no immediate threat exists".
  20. absent: Rather than stating harm, it says "no immediate threat exists".
  21. absent: The message conveys no potential harm; it denies an immediate threat.
  22. absent: The alert denies any immediate threat and describes no possible harm.
  23. absent: The notice states there is no immediate threat, so no harm is conveyed.
  24. absent: The phrase "no immediate threat exists" removes any sense of consequence.
  25. absent: The text conveys no potential harm, explicitly denying immediate threat.