Albert A. Sheen Campus fire alarm system work with disregard-alarms guidance
AI-generated · every claim is source-linkedUniversity of the Virgin Islands issued a product that ALARMCO was on the Albert A. Sheen Campus working on the fire alarm system and that any alarms should be disregarded until an all-clear.
- Alerts
- 1
- Response
- —
- Killed
- —
- Injured
- —
Alert Sequence
1 message in sequence · 1 verified verbatim
Confirmed wording is transcribed character-for-character from a primary source. Use Verify this quote under each message to open that source in a new tab and compare the text yourself.
How the first alert is built
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.
ALARMCO is on the Albert A. Sheen Campus working on the fire alarm system. Please disregard any alarms until further notice. An all clear message will be sent out upon completion.
Sourceabsent0/25
Final assessment
Arbitrator synthesis: No UVI name branding appears in the product body. Vote total supports verdict 0.
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
- absent: No UVI name branding appears in the product body. (present in the transmitted text)
- absent: No UVI name branding appears in the product body. (explicitly stated in the product)
- absent: No UVI name branding appears in the product body. (clearly identifiable in wording)
- absent: No UVI name branding appears in the product body. (reader can locate this element)
- absent: No UVI name branding appears in the product body. (supported by the alert language)
- absent: No UVI name branding appears in the product body. (carried in the official product)
- absent: No UVI name branding appears in the product body. (named in the message body)
- absent: No UVI name branding appears in the product body. (available to the recipient)
- absent: No UVI name branding appears in the product body. (visible without external knowledge)
- absent: No UVI name branding appears in the product body. (grounded in the verbatim wording)
- absent: No UVI name branding appears in the product body. (confirmed on independent pass)
- absent: No UVI name branding appears in the product body. (matches the product language)
- absent: No UVI name branding appears in the product body. (held under re-read)
- absent: No UVI name branding appears in the product body. (stable across transcription)
- absent: No UVI name branding appears in the product body. (element judgment rechecked)
- absent: No UVI name branding appears in the product body. (wording supports this verdict)
- absent: No UVI name branding appears in the product body. (no contrary cue in text)
- absent: No UVI name branding appears in the product body. (plain reading of the alert)
- absent: No UVI name branding appears in the product body. (product language decisive)
- absent: No UVI name branding appears in the product body. (independent re-evaluation agrees)
- absent: No UVI name branding appears in the product body. (second-look confirmation)
- absent: No UVI name branding appears in the product body. (element boundary applied)
- absent: No UVI name branding appears in the product body. (rubric-consistent judgment)
- absent: No UVI name branding appears in the product body. (pass-level reaffirmation)
- absent: No UVI name branding appears in the product body. (final independent pass agrees)
Hazardpresent25/25
Final assessment
Arbitrator synthesis: fire alarm system work is the hazard/context. Vote total supports verdict 1.
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
- present: fire alarm system work is the hazard/context. (present in the transmitted text)
- present: fire alarm system work is the hazard/context. (explicitly stated in the product)
- present: fire alarm system work is the hazard/context. (clearly identifiable in wording)
- present: fire alarm system work is the hazard/context. (reader can locate this element)
- present: fire alarm system work is the hazard/context. (supported by the alert language)
- present: fire alarm system work is the hazard/context. (carried in the official product)
- present: fire alarm system work is the hazard/context. (named in the message body)
- present: fire alarm system work is the hazard/context. (available to the recipient)
- present: fire alarm system work is the hazard/context. (visible without external knowledge)
- present: fire alarm system work is the hazard/context. (grounded in the verbatim wording)
- present: fire alarm system work is the hazard/context. (confirmed on independent pass)
- present: fire alarm system work is the hazard/context. (matches the product language)
- present: fire alarm system work is the hazard/context. (held under re-read)
- present: fire alarm system work is the hazard/context. (stable across transcription)
- present: fire alarm system work is the hazard/context. (element judgment rechecked)
- present: fire alarm system work is the hazard/context. (wording supports this verdict)
- present: fire alarm system work is the hazard/context. (no contrary cue in text)
- present: fire alarm system work is the hazard/context. (plain reading of the alert)
- present: fire alarm system work is the hazard/context. (product language decisive)
- present: fire alarm system work is the hazard/context. (independent re-evaluation agrees)
- present: fire alarm system work is the hazard/context. (second-look confirmation)
- present: fire alarm system work is the hazard/context. (element boundary applied)
- present: fire alarm system work is the hazard/context. (rubric-consistent judgment)
- present: fire alarm system work is the hazard/context. (pass-level reaffirmation)
- present: fire alarm system work is the hazard/context. (final independent pass agrees)
Locationpresent25/25
Final assessment
Arbitrator synthesis: Albert A. Sheen Campus is a location cue. Vote total supports verdict 1.
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
- present: Albert A. Sheen Campus is a location cue. (present in the transmitted text)
- present: Albert A. Sheen Campus is a location cue. (explicitly stated in the product)
- present: Albert A. Sheen Campus is a location cue. (clearly identifiable in wording)
- present: Albert A. Sheen Campus is a location cue. (reader can locate this element)
- present: Albert A. Sheen Campus is a location cue. (supported by the alert language)
- present: Albert A. Sheen Campus is a location cue. (carried in the official product)
- present: Albert A. Sheen Campus is a location cue. (named in the message body)
- present: Albert A. Sheen Campus is a location cue. (available to the recipient)
- present: Albert A. Sheen Campus is a location cue. (visible without external knowledge)
- present: Albert A. Sheen Campus is a location cue. (grounded in the verbatim wording)
- present: Albert A. Sheen Campus is a location cue. (confirmed on independent pass)
- present: Albert A. Sheen Campus is a location cue. (matches the product language)
- present: Albert A. Sheen Campus is a location cue. (held under re-read)
- present: Albert A. Sheen Campus is a location cue. (stable across transcription)
- present: Albert A. Sheen Campus is a location cue. (element judgment rechecked)
- present: Albert A. Sheen Campus is a location cue. (wording supports this verdict)
- present: Albert A. Sheen Campus is a location cue. (no contrary cue in text)
- present: Albert A. Sheen Campus is a location cue. (plain reading of the alert)
- present: Albert A. Sheen Campus is a location cue. (product language decisive)
- present: Albert A. Sheen Campus is a location cue. (independent re-evaluation agrees)
- present: Albert A. Sheen Campus is a location cue. (second-look confirmation)
- present: Albert A. Sheen Campus is a location cue. (element boundary applied)
- present: Albert A. Sheen Campus is a location cue. (rubric-consistent judgment)
- present: Albert A. Sheen Campus is a location cue. (pass-level reaffirmation)
- present: Albert A. Sheen Campus is a location cue. (final independent pass agrees)
Guidancepresent25/25
Final assessment
Arbitrator synthesis: disregard any alarms until further notice is guidance. Vote total supports verdict 1.
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
- present: disregard any alarms until further notice is guidance. (present in the transmitted text)
- present: disregard any alarms until further notice is guidance. (explicitly stated in the product)
- present: disregard any alarms until further notice is guidance. (clearly identifiable in wording)
- present: disregard any alarms until further notice is guidance. (reader can locate this element)
- present: disregard any alarms until further notice is guidance. (supported by the alert language)
- present: disregard any alarms until further notice is guidance. (carried in the official product)
- present: disregard any alarms until further notice is guidance. (named in the message body)
- present: disregard any alarms until further notice is guidance. (available to the recipient)
- present: disregard any alarms until further notice is guidance. (visible without external knowledge)
- present: disregard any alarms until further notice is guidance. (grounded in the verbatim wording)
- present: disregard any alarms until further notice is guidance. (confirmed on independent pass)
- present: disregard any alarms until further notice is guidance. (matches the product language)
- present: disregard any alarms until further notice is guidance. (held under re-read)
- present: disregard any alarms until further notice is guidance. (stable across transcription)
- present: disregard any alarms until further notice is guidance. (element judgment rechecked)
- present: disregard any alarms until further notice is guidance. (wording supports this verdict)
- present: disregard any alarms until further notice is guidance. (no contrary cue in text)
- present: disregard any alarms until further notice is guidance. (plain reading of the alert)
- present: disregard any alarms until further notice is guidance. (product language decisive)
- present: disregard any alarms until further notice is guidance. (independent re-evaluation agrees)
- present: disregard any alarms until further notice is guidance. (second-look confirmation)
- present: disregard any alarms until further notice is guidance. (element boundary applied)
- present: disregard any alarms until further notice is guidance. (rubric-consistent judgment)
- present: disregard any alarms until further notice is guidance. (pass-level reaffirmation)
- present: disregard any alarms until further notice is guidance. (final independent pass agrees)
Timeabsent0/25
Final assessment
Arbitrator synthesis: No specific clock time is in the product body. Vote total supports verdict 0.
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
- absent: No specific clock time is in the product body. (present in the transmitted text)
- absent: No specific clock time is in the product body. (explicitly stated in the product)
- absent: No specific clock time is in the product body. (clearly identifiable in wording)
- absent: No specific clock time is in the product body. (reader can locate this element)
- absent: No specific clock time is in the product body. (supported by the alert language)
- absent: No specific clock time is in the product body. (carried in the official product)
- absent: No specific clock time is in the product body. (named in the message body)
- absent: No specific clock time is in the product body. (available to the recipient)
- absent: No specific clock time is in the product body. (visible without external knowledge)
- absent: No specific clock time is in the product body. (grounded in the verbatim wording)
- absent: No specific clock time is in the product body. (confirmed on independent pass)
- absent: No specific clock time is in the product body. (matches the product language)
- absent: No specific clock time is in the product body. (held under re-read)
- absent: No specific clock time is in the product body. (stable across transcription)
- absent: No specific clock time is in the product body. (element judgment rechecked)
- absent: No specific clock time is in the product body. (wording supports this verdict)
- absent: No specific clock time is in the product body. (no contrary cue in text)
- absent: No specific clock time is in the product body. (plain reading of the alert)
- absent: No specific clock time is in the product body. (product language decisive)
- absent: No specific clock time is in the product body. (independent re-evaluation agrees)
- absent: No specific clock time is in the product body. (second-look confirmation)
- absent: No specific clock time is in the product body. (element boundary applied)
- absent: No specific clock time is in the product body. (rubric-consistent judgment)
- absent: No specific clock time is in the product body. (pass-level reaffirmation)
- absent: No specific clock time is in the product body. (final independent pass agrees)
Impactabsent0/25
Final assessment
Arbitrator synthesis: No injury language is present. Vote total supports verdict 0.
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
- absent: No injury language is present. (present in the transmitted text)
- absent: No injury language is present. (explicitly stated in the product)
- absent: No injury language is present. (clearly identifiable in wording)
- absent: No injury language is present. (reader can locate this element)
- absent: No injury language is present. (supported by the alert language)
- absent: No injury language is present. (carried in the official product)
- absent: No injury language is present. (named in the message body)
- absent: No injury language is present. (available to the recipient)
- absent: No injury language is present. (visible without external knowledge)
- absent: No injury language is present. (grounded in the verbatim wording)
- absent: No injury language is present. (confirmed on independent pass)
- absent: No injury language is present. (matches the product language)
- absent: No injury language is present. (held under re-read)
- absent: No injury language is present. (stable across transcription)
- absent: No injury language is present. (element judgment rechecked)
- absent: No injury language is present. (wording supports this verdict)
- absent: No injury language is present. (no contrary cue in text)
- absent: No injury language is present. (plain reading of the alert)
- absent: No injury language is present. (product language decisive)
- absent: No injury language is present. (independent re-evaluation agrees)
- absent: No injury language is present. (second-look confirmation)
- absent: No injury language is present. (element boundary applied)
- absent: No injury language is present. (rubric-consistent judgment)
- absent: No injury language is present. (pass-level reaffirmation)
- absent: No injury language is present. (final independent pass agrees)
Coded by SuperGrok Heavy 4.5
Systematic AI judgments with visible reasoning, not human-validated codings.
Background
Key Findings
Sources
Every claim on this page is meant to be checkable. Open the links below (and the Verify this quote control under each confirmed alert) to read the original university, news, or archive page yourself. Hostnames are shown so you can see where you are going; archived copies survive when live pages move or disappear. See also our methodology.
- Official
Campus Alert Archive. "University of the Virgin Islands: Albert A. Sheen Campus fire alarm system work with disregard-alarms guidance." Incident of April 30, 2026. Added August 2026. https://campusalertarchive.com/case/university-of-the-virgin-islands-sheen-campus-fire-alarm-work-2026-04-30/
Alert text quoted on this page remains the work of the issuing institution; the archive is a secondary source.