Burglary reported with campus community notice timely warning burglary

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 MIT Police were investigating" opens the account, the Special Services Division is named, and Sergeant David J O'Connor signs for the MIT Police Department.

  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: MIT Police Officers are the actors and Sergeant O'Connor of the MIT Police Department signs the notice.
  2. present: "The MIT Police were investigating" and a named sergeant of the MIT Police Department signs it.
  3. present: MIT Police officers and the Special Services Division are named, with a signed sergeant's block.
  4. present: It names MIT Police officers and its Special Services Division, and is issued by Sergeant O'Connor.
  5. present: The warning is issued by "Sergeant David J O'Connor, MIT Police Department" and names the MIT Police Special Services Division.
  6. present: It names the "MIT Police Special Services Division" and carries a signed MIT Police sergeant block.
  7. present: The text repeatedly names the MIT Police and ends with Sergeant David J O'Connor's signature block.
  8. present: Signed "Sergeant David J O'Connor, MIT Police Department", which identifies the issuing body.
  9. present: The MIT Police and its Special Services Division are named, with a signed sergeant at the close.
  10. present: It names MIT Police officers and the Special Services Division, signed by Sergeant O'Connor of the department.
  11. present: Signed "Sergeant David J O'Connor, MIT Police Department" with the Vassar Street address.
  12. present: MIT Police officers and the Special Services Division are named, with Sergeant O'Connor issuing it.
  13. present: The MIT Police and their Special Services Division are named, with a signed MIT Police Department block.
  14. present: MIT Police, including its Special Services Division, are named, and a sergeant signs for the department.
  15. present: The notice names the MIT Police and its Special Services Division and is signed by a sergeant.
  16. present: The message credits "the MIT Police" and closes with Sergeant O'Connor's department block.
  17. present: The message repeatedly identifies "the MIT Police" and closes with Sergeant O'Connor of the MIT Police Department.
  18. present: "MIT Police" and its "Special Services Division" are named, with a sergeant's signature at the end.
  19. present: MIT Police and their Special Services Division are named, with a signed departmental block at the end.
  20. present: MIT Police and the Special Services Division are named, and a sergeant signs the notice.
  21. present: MIT Police Officers and the MIT Police Special Services Division are named, with a signing sergeant.
  22. present: It identifies MIT Police officers and the Special Services Division, and is signed by Sergeant O'Connor.
  23. present: The notice is issued by a named sergeant of the "MIT Police Department" with its Vassar Street address.
  24. present: It is issued by "Sergeant David J O'Connor, MIT Police Department", clearly naming the sender.
  25. present: The text names "the MIT Police" and its "Special Services Division" as the investigating authority.
• Hazardpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  Present, 25 of 25. Officers "found two third floor offices that had been broken into and one office with visible damage to the door lock", with "signs of forced entry" in all rooms.

  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 reports offices "broken into" with "visible damage to the door lock" and "signs of forced entry", a burglary.
  2. present: It reports offices "broken into" with "visible damage to the door lock", a burglary with forced entry.
  3. present: Reports offices "broken into" with a damaged door lock, a burglary with forced entry.
  4. present: Break-ins are described: "two third floor offices that had been broken into" with forced entry and lock damage.
  5. present: It reports a burglary: "two third floor offices that had been broken into" with forced entry.
  6. present: Two offices "had been broken into" with forced entry, a burglary and property damage.
  7. present: It reports a break in: "two third floor offices that had been broken into" with forced entry.
  8. present: It reports offices "broken into" with "visible damage to the door lock", clearly a burglary.
  9. present: It reports a burglary: "two third floor offices that had been broken into" with forced entry signs.
  10. present: It reports offices "broken into" with "visible damage to the door lock", a burglary with forced entry.
  11. present: Describes offices "broken into" with "visible damage to the door lock", a burglary.
  12. present: It reports offices "broken into" with "visible damage to the door lock", a burglary with forced entry.
  13. present: It reports a break-in: "two third floor offices that had been broken into and one office with visible damage".
  14. present: It reports a burglary with "two third floor offices that had been broken into" and forced door locks.
  15. present: Describes a burglary: "two third floor offices that had been broken into" with forced entry and lock damage.
  16. present: It reports offices "broken into" with damage to a door lock, a burglary.
  17. present: It describes breaking and entering, "two third floor offices that had been broken into" with forced entry.
  18. present: It reports offices "broken into" with "visible damage to the door lock", a burglary with forced entry.
  19. present: It describes offices "broken into" with forced entry and damage to a door lock, a burglary.
  20. present: It reports offices "broken into" with "visible damage to the door lock", a burglary with forced entry.
  21. present: It reports offices "broken into" with "visible damage to the door lock", a forced burglary.
  22. present: The hazard is a break-in: "two third floor offices that had been broken into" with forced entry signs.
  23. present: It reports offices "broken into" with forced entry and damage, a burglary rather than a generic incident.
  24. present: It reports offices "broken into" with "visible damage to the door lock", a burglary with forced entry.
  25. present: It reports a break-in: "two third floor offices that had been broken into" with forced entry and a damaged lock.
• Locationpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  Present, 25 of 25. The site is "Walker Memorial (Building 50) located at 142 Memorial Drive in Cambridge", narrowed to two third floor offices.

  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 site is "Walker Memorial (Building 50) located at 142 Memorial Drive in Cambridge", third floor offices.
  2. present: It names "Walker Memorial (Building 50) located at 142 Memorial Drive in Cambridge".
  3. present: Places it at "Walker Memorial (Building 50) located at 142 Memorial Drive in Cambridge".
  4. present: Location is "Walker Memorial (Building 50) located at 142 Memorial Drive in Cambridge".
  5. present: The building is identified as "Walker Memorial (Building 50) located at 142 Memorial Drive in Cambridge".
  6. present: It cites "Walker Memorial (Building 50) located at 142 Memorial Drive in Cambridge", third floor.
  7. present: It specifies "Walker Memorial (Building 50) located at 142 Memorial Drive in Cambridge".
  8. present: The place is "Walker Memorial (Building 50) located at 142 Memorial Drive in Cambridge".
  9. present: The site is "Walker Memorial (Building 50) located at 142 Memorial Drive in Cambridge".
  10. present: The place is "Walker Memorial (Building 50) located at 142 Memorial Drive in Cambridge", third floor offices.
  11. present: Places it at "Walker Memorial (Building 50) located at 142 Memorial Drive in Cambridge", third floor.
  12. present: The building is "Walker Memorial (Building 50) located at 142 Memorial Drive in Cambridge".
  13. present: Location is "Walker Memorial (Building 50) located at 142 Memorial Drive in Cambridge".
  14. present: The place is "Walker Memorial (Building 50) located at 142 Memorial Drive in Cambridge".
  15. present: Names "Walker Memorial (Building 50) located at 142 Memorial Drive in Cambridge".
  16. present: The place is "Walker Memorial (Building 50) located at 142 Memorial Drive in Cambridge".
  17. present: It locates the break-ins at "Walker Memorial (Building 50) located at 142 Memorial Drive in Cambridge".
  18. present: The place is "Walker Memorial (Building 50) located at 142 Memorial Drive in Cambridge", third floor offices.
  19. present: The location given is "Walker Memorial (Building 50) located at 142 Memorial Drive in Cambridge".
  20. present: The site is "Walker Memorial (Building 50) located at 142 Memorial Drive in Cambridge".
  21. present: It specifies "Walker Memorial (Building 50) located at 142 Memorial Drive in Cambridge".
  22. present: It specifies "Walker Memorial (Building 50) located at 142 Memorial Drive in Cambridge".
  23. present: It names "Walker Memorial (Building 50) located at 142 Memorial Drive in Cambridge" and its third floor.
  24. present: The place is "Walker Memorial (Building 50) located at 142 Memorial Drive in Cambridge".
  25. present: The building is given as "Walker Memorial (Building 50) located at 142 Memorial Drive in Cambridge".
• Guidancepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  Present, 25 of 25. Instructions include locking doors and windows "both on campus and at your residence", never leaving "valuables at your desk or out in the open", and reporting tailgaters.

  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: It tells readers to lock doors and windows, never leave valuables out, and report tailgaters to police.
  2. present: Readers are told to lock doors, never leave valuables in the open, and report suspicious activity.
  3. present: Readers are told to lock doors and windows, never leave valuables out, and report tailgaters.
  4. present: Readers get actions: lock doors, never leave valuables in the open, report suspicious people, call the police.
  5. present: Recipients are told to lock doors and windows, never leave valuables out, and report suspicious persons.
  6. present: Community members are told to lock doors, never leave valuables out, and report tailgaters.
  7. present: It tells readers to lock doors, never leave valuables in the open, and report suspicious people.
  8. present: Recipients are told to lock doors, never leave valuables out, and report tailgaters.
  9. present: It directs readers to lock doors, never leave valuables out, and report suspicious persons.
  10. present: It tells readers to lock doors and windows, never leave valuables out, and report suspicious people.
  11. present: Instructs the community to lock doors, avoid leaving valuables out, and report tailgaters.
  12. present: Advice to the reader includes locking doors, never leaving valuables out, and reporting tailgaters.
  13. present: Readers are told to lock doors, never leave valuables in the open, and report suspicious people.
  14. present: It tells the community to lock doors, avoid leaving valuables out, and immediately notify MIT Police.
  15. present: Tells readers to lock doors, never leave valuables out, and report suspicious people to MIT Police.
  16. present: Readers are told to lock doors, never leave valuables in the open, and report tailgaters.
  17. present: Readers are instructed to lock doors, never leave valuables out and report tailgaters to police.
  18. present: It tells readers never to leave valuables in the open, to lock doors, and to notify MIT Police at once.
  19. present: It tells readers to lock doors and windows, never leave valuables out, and report tailgaters.
  20. present: Readers are told to lock doors, never leave valuables in the open, and report suspicious people.
  21. present: Advice to lock doors, never leave valuables out and report tailgaters is aimed at the reader.
  22. present: Recipients are told to lock doors, never leave valuables in the open, and report tailgaters to police.
  23. present: Readers are told to lock doors and windows, never leave valuables out, and report suspicious persons.
  24. present: Readers are told to lock doors and windows, never leave valuables in the open, and report suspicious activity.
  25. present: It tells readers to lock doors and windows, never leave valuables out, and notify MIT Police of crime.
• Timepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  Present, 25 of 25. Timing is anchored to "On the morning of July 20, 2020", with the Special Services Division "currently investigating a known person of interest".

  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 recency cue is "On the morning of July 20, 2020", with the investigation "currently" underway.
  2. present: It is anchored to "the morning of July 20, 2020" and says the investigation is "currently" ongoing.
  3. present: Dated to "the morning of July 20, 2020", giving day and part of day.
  4. present: Recency is set by "On the morning of July 20, 2020" and the note that investigation is "currently" underway.
  5. present: It fixes the discovery to "the morning of July 20, 2020".
  6. present: "On the morning of July 20, 2020" and "currently investigating" convey the timing and recency.
  7. present: Recency is given as "On the morning of July 20, 2020".
  8. present: It begins "On the morning of July 20, 2020", giving a date and a time of day.
  9. present: The event is anchored to "the morning of July 20, 2020".
  10. present: The event is dated to "the morning of July 20, 2020".
  11. present: Says it happened "On the morning of July 20, 2020".
  12. present: It is anchored to "the morning of July 20, 2020" and says the investigation is "currently" underway.
  13. present: It is dated "On the morning of July 20, 2020", a specific day and part of day.
  14. present: The timing is "the morning of July 20, 2020", a date and part of day.
  15. present: Says it happened "On the morning of July 20, 2020", a dated recency cue.
  16. present: It is dated to "the morning of July 20, 2020".
  17. present: Recency is given as "On the morning of July 20, 2020".
  18. present: It is anchored to "the morning of July 20, 2020", a dated recency cue.
  19. present: The timing is "On the morning of July 20, 2020", a dated recency cue.
  20. present: It is dated "On the morning of July 20, 2020", giving day and rough hour.
  21. present: Dated to "the morning of July 20, 2020".
  22. present: "On the morning of July 20, 2020" dates the investigation, a clear recency cue.
  23. present: It dates the investigation to "the morning of July 20, 2020".
  24. present: The opening phrase "On the morning of July 20, 2020" supplies the date and rough time.
  25. present: Recency is given by "On the morning of July 20, 2020" and "is currently investigating".
• Impactabsent0/25

  Final assessment

  Absent, 0 of 25 voted present. Forced entry and "visible damage to the door lock" are reported as facts, yet no consequence or level of danger to the community is stated.

  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: Damage to a lock is reported, but no consequence or severity is stated for people reading the warning.
  2. absent: Property damage is described factually without any statement of risk or severity to the community.
  3. absent: Damage to a lock is mentioned but no severity or risk to people is conveyed.
  4. absent: Property damage to a door lock is mentioned but no danger or consequence to people is conveyed.
  5. absent: Damage to a door lock is mentioned as evidence, but no consequence or danger to the community is asserted.
  6. absent: No statement describes danger to people; the consequence described is only office break-ins.
  7. absent: Only property damage to a door lock is mentioned, with no statement of risk or severity.
  8. absent: No statement of possible harm appears; the break in is reported as a completed property crime.
  9. absent: No consequence or severity is asserted, only damage to a door lock and an ongoing inquiry.
  10. absent: Only property damage already done is described; no severity or future risk to people is stated.
  11. absent: Property damage is noted as fact, but no consequence or danger is conveyed to readers.
  12. absent: Damage to a lock is mentioned but no statement of danger or seriousness for the community.
  13. absent: Only property damage to locks and offices is noted, with no consequence or danger stated for people.
  14. absent: Only property damage to a lock is noted, with no statement of risk or severity to people.
  15. absent: Property damage to a door lock is noted but no severity or threat to persons is conveyed.
  16. absent: Only property damage to a lock is noted, with no expressed threat to people or severity.
  17. absent: Damage to a door lock is mentioned but no severity or risk to persons is conveyed.
  18. absent: Only property damage to locks is mentioned; no consequence or severity for readers is stated.
  19. absent: No consequence or severity to people is stated, only property damage discovered after the fact.
  20. absent: Damage to a lock is mentioned but no statement of danger or severity to persons.
  21. absent: Property damage is noted but no harm, threat level or seriousness for the community is expressed.
  22. absent: Damage to a door lock is mentioned but no consequence or threat to people is stated.
  23. absent: Visible lock damage is mentioned as evidence, but no consequence or seriousness for readers is stated.
  24. absent: Only damage to a lock is mentioned; no statement of risk or seriousness for readers is given.
  25. absent: The notice reports damage to a lock but offers no statement of risk or severity to the community.