Residential shelter-in-place lifted after police found the report unfounded

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

  25 of 25 passes found a source: the University as the issuer and the Tampa Police Department as the responding agency.

  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 message identifies "the University" as the sender and "Tampa Police Department" as the responding authority.
  2. present: The text names the University as the sender and the Tampa Police Department as the agency that responded.
  3. present: The University and the Tampa Police Department are named as the sending and responding authorities.
  4. present: The sender is identified because the text says "the University" issued the alert and names the Tampa Police Department.
  5. present: This notice names the University as the sender and the Tampa Police Department as the responding agency.
  6. present: The opening says the University issued the notification, and the middle names the Tampa Police Department.
  7. present: The University is named as the sender, and the Tampa Police Department is named as the responding agency.
  8. present: Readers see the University identify itself as the sender and the Tampa Police Department as the agency that responds.
  9. present: Naming the University as issuer and Tampa Police Department as the responding agency identifies who sent and handled the notice.
  10. present: Yes, the University is named as the issuer and the Tampa Police Department is named as the responding authority.
  11. present: "the University" and "Tampa Police Department" name the issuer and the responding authority.
  12. present: The message names the University along with the Tampa Police Department.
  13. present: The residential notice identifies the sender as the University and names the Tampa Police Department as the responding agency.
  14. present: The University identifies itself as the sender, and Tampa Police Department is named as the responding agency.
  15. present: The text names the school as sender and the city police who investigated, "Tampa Police Department".
  16. present: A recipient would learn the University issued the notice and that the Tampa Police Department investigated on campus.
  17. present: The message names the University and the Tampa Police Department as the issuing and responding authorities.
  18. present: The text names the University as the issuer of the notification and the all clear, and it names the Tampa Police Department, also called TPD, as the agency that responded.
  19. present: Identified the University as the sender and the Tampa Police Department as the responding agency.
  20. present: The message names "the University" as the issuer and "Tampa Police Department" as the responding agency.
  21. present: The notice names the University as the issuer and the Tampa Police Department as the responding agency.
  22. present: The message says the University issued the notification and names the Tampa Police Department, also called TPD.
  23. present: Present: The message names the University as sender and the Tampa Police Department as the responding agency.
  24. present: The message names the University as sender and the Tampa Police Department as the responding agency.
  25. present: The sender is named: the University issued the alerts and the Tampa Police Department investigated.
• Hazardabsent0/25

  Final assessment

  0 of 25 passes found a specific hazard. The notice says a reported incident and an emergency, which the rubric does not count as a named threat.

  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: A named threat such as a shooting, fire, weapon, or intruder is missing.
  2. absent: The text refers only to a reported incident and an unfounded emergency, which does not name a specific threat.
  3. absent: It mentions only a reported incident and an unfounded emergency, not a specific threat.
  4. absent: The hazard is absent because the text only mentions a "reported incident" and "reported emergency", never a specific threat.
  5. absent: This notice mentions only a reported incident and a reported emergency, which do not name a specific threat.
  6. absent: The cue is missing because only a reported incident or emergency is mentioned, not a specific threat.
  7. absent: The campus message calls it a reported incident and an unfounded emergency, without naming any specific threat.
  8. absent: Readers get no named hazard, because "incident" and "emergency" stay generic and never state what the threat is.
  9. absent: Only the vague words incident and emergency appear, and those generic labels do not name a specific threat.
  10. absent: No specific threat is named, only a reported incident, a reported emergency, and an unfounded report.
  11. absent: "reported incident" and "reported emergency" stay generic and never name a specific threat.
  12. absent: The message refers only to a reported incident without naming any specific threat.
  13. absent: The residential notice mentions only a reported incident and an unfounded emergency, without naming a specific threat.
  14. absent: The wording stays generic with incident and emergency, and unfounded never names the kind of threat.
  15. absent: It never names a specific threat and uses only a generic label, "a reported incident".
  16. absent: A recipient would not learn what the threat was, only that a reported incident or emergency was unfounded.
  17. absent: It only refers to a reported incident and an unfounded emergency, with no specific threat stated.
  18. absent: It speaks only of a reported incident and a reported emergency that was unfounded, and it never names a specific hazard such as a crime, fire, or weapon.
  19. absent: Characterized the event only as a reported incident and an unfounded emergency, without naming any specific threat.
  20. absent: It mentions a "reported incident" and a "reported emergency", but those generic labels are not a specific threat such as a shooting, fire, or intruder.
  21. absent: The notice mentions only a reported incident and an unfounded emergency, without naming a specific threat.
  22. absent: The University and TPD mention only a reported incident and an unfounded emergency, not a specific threat.
  23. absent: Absent: It refers only to a reported incident and emergency, and never names a specific threat.
  24. absent: It only says a reported incident and a reported emergency, and a generic incident is not a hazard.
  25. absent: No specific hazard is named: the text mentions only a reported incident and an unfounded emergency.
• Locationpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  25 of 25 passes found a place: campus, and the residential community on it.

  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 text says police "responded to campus" and notes a presence "on campus".
  2. present: The text says police responded to campus and mentions the residential community and presence on campus.
  3. present: It says Tampa Police responded to campus and notes a presence observed on campus.
  4. present: Location is present because police "responded to campus" and the message refers to activity "on campus".
  5. present: This notice says police responded to campus and notes a law enforcement presence on campus.
  6. present: The middle says police responded to campus and mentions activity observed on campus.
  7. present: It says the Tampa Police Department responded to campus and mentions the residential community.
  8. present: Readers find the place in phrases that put the response "to campus" and mention presence "on campus."
  9. present: Campus is the stated place: police responded to campus and a presence was observed on campus.
  10. present: Yes, it says the incident affected campus, police responded to campus, and law enforcement was observed on campus.
  11. present: "campus" and "on campus" say where police responded and where the notification applied.
  12. present: The message places the police response on campus.
  13. present: The residential notice says police responded to campus and notes a presence on campus.
  14. present: It places the response on campus, including the residential community and activity observed on campus.
  15. present: It places the police response and the later questions on the school grounds, "on campus".
  16. present: A recipient would learn the report concerned campus and the residential community.
  17. present: It names campus and on campus as where police responded and the alert was observed.
  18. present: It says Tampa Police responded to campus, that there is no known threat to campus, and that law enforcement was observed on campus, which states where the event was.
  19. present: Located the response on campus and tied it to the residential community.
  20. present: It says Tampa Police "responded to campus" and notes a presence "on campus".
  21. present: The notice says police responded to campus and refers to the residential community there.
  22. present: Tampa Police Department responded to campus, and the message refers to the residential community on campus.
  23. present: Present: It says the Tampa Police Department responded to campus and notes activity on campus.
  24. present: It says police responded to campus and refers to the residential community.
  25. present: A place is given: Tampa police responded to campus and the note concerns the residential community.
• Guidanceabsent3/25

  Final assessment

  3 of 25 passes found guidance. The majority treated the shelter direction as a past event being narrated, not an instruction to the reader now.

  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. absent: A current protective instruction to the reader is missing, and the past shelter wording only describes an earlier notice.
  2. absent: The text only recounts that an earlier notification directed people to shelter in place and that an all clear followed.
  3. present: It says the University directed the residential community to shelter in place.
  4. absent: Guidance is absent because "shelter in place" only reports an earlier order, and this message gives the reader no protective instruction.
  5. absent: This notice recounts an earlier shelter in place direction and a later all clear, without instructing the reader to act.
  6. absent: The cue is missing because shelter in place is described as a past order, not told as an instruction now.
  7. present: The University directed the residential community to shelter in place, a protective instruction to that community.
  8. absent: Readers get a description of an earlier shelter in place direction, not a current protective instruction to them.
  9. absent: Recounting an earlier direction to shelter in place informs readers about a past order rather than instructing them now.
  10. absent: No instruction tells recipients what to do now, since shelter in place only describes the earlier notification and resumed operations are not a directive.
  11. absent: "shelter in place" only retells a past notification, and "all clear" with resumed operations gives no protective instruction now.
  12. absent: The message recounts a past shelter-in-place notice instead of a current instruction.
  13. absent: The residential notice only recalls a past shelter-in-place direction that was lifted, and it gives readers no current protective instruction.
  14. absent: Shelter in place only recounts an earlier notification, and readers receive no current protective instruction.
  15. present: It states the protective action the residential community was told to take, "directing the residential community to shelter in place".
  16. absent: A recipient would learn an earlier notice ordered sheltering, but this message gives no protective action to take now.
  17. absent: It only recounts an earlier shelter in place direction and the all clear, without a current instruction.
  18. absent: It recalls that an earlier notification directed the residential community to shelter in place, but this update itself gives readers no protective instruction and says normal operations have resumed.
  19. absent: Recounted a prior shelter in place direction and a later all clear, without instructing current readers to act.
  20. absent: It only recounts an earlier notice "directing the residential community to shelter in place", rather than telling this reader to shelter, avoid, or call.
  21. absent: The notice recounts a past shelter direction and an all clear, but it gives the reader no current protective instruction.
  22. absent: Shelter in place is only recounted as an earlier University order, and this note gives no current protective instruction.
  23. absent: Absent: Shelter in place is only a past directive being described, not an instruction to current readers.
  24. absent: Police response and investigation are responder activity, not an instruction, and the past shelter-in-place is only described.
  25. absent: No instruction is issued to readers: shelter in place is only a description of an earlier direction.
• Timepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  25 of 25 passes found time: Sept. 28, 2026, about 12:50 a.m., and about 1:10 a.m.

  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: The text includes the date "Sept. 28, 2026" and the time "12:50 a.m. this morning".
  2. present: The text includes Sept. 28, 2026, about 12:50 a.m., this morning, and about 1:10 a.m.
  3. present: It gives Sept. 28, 2026, this morning, 12:50 a.m., and 1:10 a.m.
  4. present: Time is present because the text states Sept. 28, 2026, "this morning", "12:50 a.m.", and "1:10 a.m."
  5. present: This notice includes the date Sept. 28, 2026 and clock times of about 12:50 a.m. and 1:10 a.m.
  6. present: The opening states Sept. 28, 2026, and approximately 12:50 a.m. this morning.
  7. present: It gives Sept. 28, 2026, about 12:50 a.m. this morning, and about 1:10 a.m. for the all clear on campus.
  8. present: Readers see the date Sept. 28, 2026, the phrase "this morning," and the clock times 12:50 a.m. and 1:10 a.m.
  9. present: Several time cues are present, including Sept. 28, 2026, about 12:50 a.m., 1:10 a.m., and this morning.
  10. present: Yes, it includes the date Sept. 28, 2026, about 12:50 a.m., about 1:10 a.m., and this morning.
  11. present: "Sept. 28, 2026", "12:50 a.m.", and "this morning" say when the notification and the all clear happened.
  12. present: The message includes the time 12:50 a.m. this morning.
  13. present: The residential notice includes Sept. 28, 2026, this morning, and clock times near 12:50 a.m. and 1:10 a.m.
  14. present: The message carries the date Sept. 28, 2026, the times 12:50 a.m. and 1:10 a.m., and this morning.
  15. present: It gives a calendar date and clock times for the notice and the all clear, "At approximately 12:50 a.m. this morning".
  16. present: A recipient would learn the alert was at about 12:50 a.m. this morning on Sept. 28, 2026, with an all clear at 1:10 a.m.
  17. present: It names Sept. 28, 2026, about 12:50 a.m. this morning, and an all clear at 1:10 a.m.
  18. present: It includes the date Sept. 28, 2026, clock times of about 12:50 a.m. and 1:10 a.m., plus recency wording such as this morning, overnight hours, and an all clear.
  19. present: Recorded Sept. 28, 2026, about 12:50 a.m., this morning, and about 1:10 a.m.
  20. present: It gives the date "Sept. 28, 2026" and the times "12:50 a.m. this morning" and "1:10 a.m."
  21. present: The notice gives Sept. 28, 2026, about 12:50 a.m. this morning, and about 1:10 a.m. for the all clear.
  22. present: It includes the date Sept. 28, 2026, clock times 12:50 a.m. and 1:10 a.m., and this morning.
  23. present: Present: It includes Sept. 28, 2026, about 12:50 a.m. this morning, and about 1:10 a.m.
  24. present: It gives the date Sept. 28, 2026 and the clock times 12:50 a.m. and 1:10 a.m.
  25. present: Recency is clear: the text gives a September date, this morning, and two approximate clock times.
• Impactabsent2/25

  Final assessment

  2 of 25 passes found impact. The majority read unfounded and no known threat as the absence of a stated harm, not as a severity line.

  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: A stated harm or severity cue, such as injury or life-threatening danger, is missing.
  2. absent: The text says the report was unfounded and there is no known threat, which states no harm or severity.
  3. absent: It calls the report unfounded and states no known threat, without naming harm or severity.
  4. absent: Impact is absent because an unfounded report and "no known threat" do not state injury, damage, or severity.
  5. absent: This notice says the report was unfounded and there is no known threat, but it states no injury or other harm.
  6. absent: The cue is missing because the text never states injury, damage, or how serious a hazard could be.
  7. present: It states there is no known threat to campus, which gives the severity after the report was unfounded.
  8. absent: Readers find no harm, injury, or severity, only a statement that the report is unfounded and no threat is known.
  9. absent: Nothing states a consequence or severity such as injury or danger; unfounded and no known threat only close the report.
  10. absent: No harm or severity is described, and saying there is no known threat does not state what a hazard could do.
  11. absent: "no known threat" denies danger, and the text never states injury, damage, or other harm.
  12. absent: The message states no harm or severity from the unfounded report.
  13. absent: The residential notice says the report was unfounded and there is no known threat, without describing injury, damage, or danger.
  14. absent: Unfounded and no known threat deny a danger without describing injury, damage, or how severe a hazard could be.
  15. absent: It denies danger but never says what harm the incident could cause, "There is no known threat to campus".
  16. absent: A recipient would not learn what harm could occur, only that the report was unfounded and no known threat remains.
  17. absent: It only says the report was unfounded and there is no known threat, without stated harm or severity.
  18. absent: It says the reported emergency was unfounded and that there is no known threat to campus, which denies harm rather than stating any consequence or severity.
  19. absent: Denied any current harm, since the report was unfounded and no known threat remains.
  20. absent: It says the report was "unfounded" and there is "no known threat", but it never states a consequence such as injury or danger.
  21. absent: The notice says the report was unfounded and there is no known threat, without describing harm or severity.
  22. present: It states there is no known threat, which is an explicit statement of severity.
  23. absent: Absent: It says the emergency was unfounded and there is no known threat, without stating harm or severity.
  24. absent: It says the emergency was unfounded and there is no known threat, without stating any harm or severity.
  25. absent: No harm or severity is described: an unfounded report and no known threat do not state consequences.