Campus emergency response update

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. The university identifies itself as the actor handling the problem: "UW is working on turning off the alarms. We are also investigating the cause."

  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 text says "UW is working on turning off the alarms", so the university identifies itself as sender.
  2. present: The university identifies itself as the responder, "UW is working on turning off the alarms".
  3. present: "UW is working on turning off the alarms" identifies the university as the responding sender.
  4. present: The sender identifies itself as the institution, "UW is working on turning off the alarms."
  5. present: The institution identifies itself as the responder: "UW is working on turning off the alarms".
  6. present: The sender speaks as the institution: "UW is working on turning off the alarms".
  7. present: The sender identifies itself as the university: "UW is working on turning off the alarms".
  8. present: "UW is working on turning off the alarms" identifies the university as the responding and sending party.
  9. present: The text says "UW is working on turning off the alarms", so the university identifies itself as sender.
  10. present: The sender speaks as the institution: "UW is working on turning off the alarms".
  11. present: The sender identifies itself institutionally: "UW is working on turning off the alarms. We are also investigating."
  12. present: The sender identifies itself as the university: "UW is working on turning off the alarms."
  13. present: The university identifies itself as the responder, "UW is working on turning off the alarms".
  14. present: The university identifies itself as responder, "UW is working on turning off the alarms".
  15. present: The sender speaks as the institution, saying "UW is working on turning off the alarms."
  16. present: The university identifies itself as responder: "UW is working on turning off the alarms".
  17. present: The sender identifies itself as the university, "UW is working on turning off the alarms".
  18. present: The sender identifies itself as the university: "UW is working on turning off the alarms".
  19. present: The university names itself as the actor: "UW is working on turning off the alarms".
  20. present: The University speaks as itself, "UW is working on turning off the alarms" and investigating the cause.
  21. present: The university speaks as sender, "UW is working on turning off the alarms", identifying the issuing institution.
  22. present: The sender identifies itself institutionally, "UW is working on turning off the alarms."
  23. present: The university identifies itself as actor: "UW is working on turning off the alarms."
  24. present: The sender speaks as the university, "UW is working on turning off the alarms."
  25. present: "UW is working on turning off the alarms" has the university identifying itself as the responding sender.
• Hazardpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  Present, 25 of 25. It names "a campus-wide power surge" that set off building alarms, a specific cause rather than an unexplained 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: It names a "campus-wide power surge" that set off building alarms, a specific condition.
  2. present: It names a "campus-wide power surge" that set off building alarms, a specific event rather than a vague incident.
  3. present: A specific hazard is named: "A campus-wide power surge" that set off building alarms.
  4. present: A "campus-wide power surge" is a specific named hazard, not a vague incident word.
  5. present: The specific problem is named, "A campus-wide power surge" that set off building alarms.
  6. present: A "campus-wide power surge" is named as the specific problem.
  7. present: It names a "campus-wide power surge" that set off building alarms, a specific failure.
  8. present: It names a specific technical hazard, "A campus-wide power surge", with alarms sounding as a result.
  9. present: "A campus-wide power surge" is a specific named hazard, not a vague incident.
  10. present: A "campus-wide power surge" with alarms sounding is a specific named problem, not a vague incident.
  11. present: It names a specific technical hazard, a "campus-wide power surge" that set off building alarms.
  12. present: It names a "campus-wide power surge" that set off building alarms, a specific problem.
  13. present: It names the specific problem, "A campus-wide power surge", not a vague incident word.
  14. present: It names a specific technical hazard, "A campus-wide power surge", not a vague incident word.
  15. present: It specifies "a campus-wide power surge" that set off building alarms, a concrete technical hazard.
  16. present: It names a "campus-wide power surge" that set off building alarms, a specific condition rather than a vague incident.
  17. present: It names a "campus-wide power surge" that set off building alarms, a specific problem.
  18. present: It names a specific technical hazard, a "campus-wide power surge" setting off alarms.
  19. present: A "campus-wide power surge" and resulting building alarms are named specifically, not left as a vague incident.
  20. present: It names the specific problem, a "campus-wide power surge" that set off building alarms.
  21. present: It names a "campus-wide power surge" that set off building alarms, a specific rather than generic problem.
  22. present: The specific event is named, "A campus-wide power surge," with resulting building alarms.
  23. present: It names a "campus-wide power surge" that set off building alarms, a specific condition.
  24. present: It names a "campus-wide power surge", a specific electrical hazard rather than a vague incident.
  25. present: A "campus-wide power surge" that set off building alarms is a specific, named problem.
• Locationpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  Present, 25 of 25. The scope is given as campus wide, with "alarms going off in several campus buildings," which locates the disturbance even without naming individual buildings.

  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 is campus wide and affects "several campus buildings", which locates the problem.
  2. present: It places the problem campus wide, "alarms going off in several campus buildings".
  3. present: It says the surge was campus wide and affected "several campus buildings."
  4. present: It is campus wide and affecting "several campus buildings," which locates the problem.
  5. present: It is described as campus-wide and affecting "several campus buildings".
  6. present: It places the event campus-wide and in "several campus buildings".
  7. present: It places the surge "campus-wide" and in "several campus buildings".
  8. present: The location is given as campus wide, "alarms going off in several campus buildings".
  9. present: It locates the problem "campus-wide" and in "several campus buildings".
  10. present: Location is given as campus-wide and "several campus buildings".
  11. present: The scope is given as campus-wide and "several campus buildings".
  12. present: It locates the surge campus wide and in "several campus buildings".
  13. present: It is placed campus wide, with alarms "going off in several campus buildings".
  14. present: It locates the effects "campus-wide" and in "several campus buildings".
  15. present: It places the problem campus wide and in "several campus buildings."
  16. present: It is described as campus wide and affecting "several campus buildings".
  17. present: Location is campus wide, "alarms going off in several campus buildings".
  18. present: It places the problem campus wide and in "several campus buildings".
  19. present: It places the problem "campus-wide" and in "several campus buildings".
  20. present: It places the event campus wide and in "several campus buildings".
  21. present: The scope is stated as campus-wide, affecting "several campus buildings".
  22. present: It says the surge was "campus-wide" and affected "several campus buildings."
  23. present: It places the problem campus wide and in "several campus buildings".
  24. present: Location is given as campus wide, affecting "several campus buildings".
  25. present: It says the surge was campus wide and affected "several campus buildings".
• Guidanceabsent0/25

  Final assessment

  Absent, 0 of 25. Recipients are given nothing to do; the text describes only UW's own actions, turning off the alarms and investigating the cause.

  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: Recipients are given no action to take: only what UW itself is doing is described.
  2. absent: Readers are told nothing to do; the text only describes what UW is doing about the alarms.
  3. absent: No protective action is requested of readers, only a note that the cause is being investigated.
  4. absent: No protective action is asked of recipients; the text only reports what UW is doing.
  5. absent: No protective action is asked of recipients; the text only says the university is investigating.
  6. absent: No protective action is asked of readers; the message only reports what UW is doing.
  7. absent: No protective action is requested of readers; only what UW is doing is described.
  8. absent: No protective action is requested of recipients; the text only reports what the university is doing.
  9. absent: No protective action is asked of readers; it only reports that UW is fixing things.
  10. absent: No protective action is requested of readers; the message only describes what UW is doing.
  11. absent: Readers are given no action to take; the note only says the university is working on the alarms.
  12. absent: Recipients are given no action to take; the text only describes what UW is doing.
  13. absent: Recipients are given no protective action; the text only reports that UW is investigating.
  14. absent: No protective action is asked of recipients, only a statement that UW is fixing things.
  15. absent: Recipients are given no action to take; the message only reports what the university is doing about the alarms.
  16. absent: No protective action is asked of recipients, only a statement that UW is investigating.
  17. absent: Recipients are given no action to take; the text only describes what UW is doing.
  18. absent: Recipients are given no protective action; the text only describes what UW is doing.
  19. absent: No protective action is requested of recipients; the message only reports what UW is doing about the alarms.
  20. absent: No protective action is asked of readers; the message only describes what UW is doing.
  21. absent: Recipients are given no action at all; the text only reports what UW is doing about the alarms.
  22. absent: The text only describes what UW is doing; it gives recipients no action to take.
  23. absent: No protective action is asked of readers; the message only reports what UW is doing.
  24. absent: No action is asked of recipients; it only says the university is investigating and silencing alarms.
  25. absent: Recipients are given no action at all, only reassurance that the cause is being investigated.
• Timepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  Present, 25 of 25. The surge was "reported at around 1 p.m.," and "There is no emergency at this time" anchors the status to the moment of sending.

  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 phrase "reported at around 1 p.m." plus "at this time" supplies timing.
  2. present: Recency is given as a surge "reported at around 1 p.m." with "no emergency at this time".
  3. present: It gives "reported at around 1 p.m." and "at this time."
  4. present: It gives a time reference, "reported at around 1 p.m.," and "at this time."
  5. present: It gives a time cue, "reported at around 1 p.m." and "at this time".
  6. present: It says the surge was "reported at around 1 p.m." and adds "at this time".
  7. present: It reports the surge "at around 1 p.m." and adds "at this time".
  8. present: It gives a time cue, "reported at around 1 p.m.", and the phrase "at this time".
  9. present: "Reported at around 1 p.m." and "at this time" supply the timing.
  10. present: It gives "around 1 p.m." and says "at this time", both recency cues.
  11. present: It fixes the event in time with "reported at around 1 p.m." and "at this time".
  12. present: It says the surge was "reported at around 1 p.m." and adds "at this time".
  13. present: The onset is timed, "reported at around 1 p.m.", a clear clock reference.
  14. present: It gives a clock reference, "reported at around 1 p.m.", plus "at this time".
  15. present: It says the surge was "reported at around 1 p.m." and adds "at this time."
  16. present: It gives an onset time, "reported at around 1 p.m.", and says "at this time".
  17. present: It reports the surge "at around 1 p.m." and says "no emergency at this time".
  18. present: It gives a clock reference, the surge was "reported at around 1 p.m.", plus "at this time".
  19. present: It says the surge was "reported at around 1 p.m." and that there is no emergency "at this time".
  20. present: It anchors the event with "reported at around 1 p.m." and says "no emergency at this time".
  21. present: It anchors the event in time with "reported at around 1 p.m." and "at this time".
  22. present: It states the surge was "reported at around 1 p.m." and adds "at this time."
  23. present: It gives a time of onset, "reported at around 1 p.m.".
  24. present: It gives "reported at around 1 p.m." and adds "no emergency at this time".
  25. present: It times the event "at around 1 p.m." and says "no emergency at this time".
• Impactabsent5/25

  Final assessment

  Absent, 5 of 25. The message expressly denies consequence, "There is no emergency at this time." The five dissenters cited "other disruptions," which is nuisance rather than harm or 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: It says flatly "There is no emergency at this time", conveying no consequence or severity.
  2. absent: It explicitly downplays consequences, saying "There is no emergency at this time", and names no potential harm.
  3. present: It states the resulting effects: "alarms going off in several campus buildings and other disruptions."
  4. absent: It explicitly downplays consequences, "There is no emergency at this time," and describes only alarms and disruptions.
  5. absent: Impact is expressly denied: "There is no emergency at this time".
  6. absent: It explicitly says "There is no emergency", conveying no potential harm or severity.
  7. absent: It expressly downplays consequences, "There is no emergency at this time", with no severity stated.
  8. absent: Severity is expressly negated: "There is no emergency at this time", with no consequence described.
  9. present: It states the consequence: "alarms going off in several campus buildings and other disruptions".
  10. absent: It explicitly minimizes consequence, "There is no emergency at this time", and names no potential harm.
  11. absent: It explicitly says "There is no emergency at this time", so no consequence or severity is conveyed.
  12. absent: It expressly denies severity, "There is no emergency at this time", and names no consequence.
  13. present: It states the effects, alarms sounding in several buildings "and other disruptions".
  14. absent: It explicitly downplays harm, "There is no emergency at this time", and names no potential consequence.
  15. absent: It explicitly minimizes severity with "There is no emergency at this time" and describes no potential harm.
  16. present: It reports concrete effects: alarms sounding in several buildings "and other disruptions".
  17. absent: Severity is actively downplayed: "There is no emergency at this time", with no consequence stated.
  18. absent: Severity is explicitly denied, "There is no emergency at this time", with no harm described.
  19. absent: It explicitly denies consequence, stating "There is no emergency at this time", with no harm described.
  20. absent: It explicitly downplays consequence, "There is no emergency at this time", and names no harm.
  21. absent: Far from stating consequences, it explicitly says "There is no emergency at this time".
  22. absent: Severity is actively denied rather than conveyed: "There is no emergency at this time."
  23. absent: It expressly says "There is no emergency at this time", conveying no consequence or severity.
  24. present: It states the consequence: alarms sounding in several buildings "and other disruptions" across campus.
  25. absent: It actively downplays consequence, saying there is no emergency, and names no harm beyond vague "disruptions".