active-threat campus emergency notice — explosive device

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 by 25 of 25. Both entries are branded "MU Alert" and "MU Alert Update", and "MUPD" is named as having determined the object was not explosive.

  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 messages are branded "MU Alert" and credit MUPD with determining the object was harmless.
  2. present: The message carries the "MU Alert" signature and credits MUPD with the determination.
  3. present: "MU Alert" signs both entries and "MUPD" is named as determining the object was not explosive.
  4. present: The message is branded "MU Alert" and credits MUPD with the determination.
  5. present: It is signed "MU Alert" and says MUPD made the determination.
  6. present: The update is branded "MU Alert" and credits MUPD with determining the object was harmless.
  7. present: It is signed "MU Alert" and names MUPD as determining the object was harmless.
  8. present: It carries the "MU Alert" signature and names MUPD as determining the outcome.
  9. present: The message is branded "MU Alert" and names MUPD as determining the outcome.
  10. present: "MU Alert" signs the message and MUPD is named as determining the outcome.
  11. present: The "MU Alert" signature and MUPD are both identified as the sending authority.
  12. present: The updates are branded "MU Alert" and attribute the determination to MUPD.
  13. present: "MU Alert" is the branded sender and MUPD is credited with the determination.
  14. present: The "MU Alert" brand and MUPD are both named as issuing and resolving the notice.
  15. present: Messages are signed "MU Alert" with MUPD credited for the determination.
  16. present: The messages are branded "MU Alert" and credit MUPD with the determination.
  17. present: It is signed "MU Alert" and names MUPD as determining the object was not explosive.
  18. present: The messages are branded "MU Alert" and credit MUPD with the determination.
  19. present: The branded "MU Alert" tag and MUPD identify who is speaking.
  20. present: The updates are branded "MU Alert" and credit "MUPD" with determining the object was not a device.
  21. present: Both messages carry the "MU Alert" signature and MUPD is named as making the determination.
  22. present: The messages are signed "MU Alert" and credit MUPD with the determination.
  23. present: Both messages are branded "MU Alert" and cite MUPD as determining the object was harmless.
  24. present: "MU Alert" is the sender tag and "MUPD" is named as responding.
  25. present: The messages are branded "MU Alert" with MUPD making the determination.
• Hazardpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  Present by 25 of 25. The initial message reports a "Suspected possible explosive device found", which every read treated as a specific and named bomb hazard.

  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 a "Suspected possible explosive device found", a specific bomb hazard.
  2. present: It reports a "Suspected possible explosive device found", a specific bomb hazard.
  3. present: It reports a "Suspected possible explosive device found", a specific hazard.
  4. present: It reports a "Suspected possible explosive device", a specific threat.
  5. present: It reports a "Suspected possible explosive device found", a specific threat.
  6. present: It reports a "Suspected possible explosive device found", a specific explosive threat.
  7. present: The hazard is a "Suspected possible explosive device found", explicitly stated.
  8. present: It reports a "Suspected possible explosive device found at Fourth Street and Conley Avenue".
  9. present: It reports a "Suspected possible explosive device found", a specific hazard.
  10. present: It reports a "Suspected possible explosive device found", a specific threat.
  11. present: It reports a "Suspected possible explosive device found", a specific threat.
  12. present: It reports a "Suspected possible explosive device found", a specific threat.
  13. present: It reports a "Suspected possible explosive device found", a specific threat.
  14. present: It reports a "Suspected possible explosive device found", a specific named threat.
  15. present: It names a "Suspected possible explosive device" found in the street area.
  16. present: It reports a "Suspected possible explosive device", a specific hazard.
  17. present: It reports a "Suspected possible explosive device found", a specific bomb related threat.
  18. present: It reports a "Suspected possible explosive device found", a specific bomb hazard.
  19. present: It reports a "Suspected possible explosive device found", a specific bomb hazard.
  20. present: It reports a "Suspected possible explosive device found", a specific bomb hazard.
  21. present: It reports a "Suspected possible explosive device found", a specific bomb hazard.
  22. present: It reports a "Suspected possible explosive device found", a specific threat.
  23. present: It reports a "Suspected possible explosive device found", a specific threat.
  24. present: It reports a "Suspected possible explosive device found", a specific threat.
  25. present: It reports a "Suspected possible explosive device found".
• Locationpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  Present by 25 of 25. The device is placed "at Fourth Street and Conley Avenue", a named intersection that fixes the danger zone readers must leave.

  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 object is located at "Fourth Street and Conley Avenue".
  2. present: The device location is "Fourth Street and Conley Avenue".
  3. present: The device was found "at Fourth Street and Conley Avenue", a named intersection.
  4. present: The device location is "Fourth Street and Conley Avenue".
  5. present: The device was found "at Fourth Street and Conley Avenue".
  6. present: The device location is "Fourth Street and Conley Avenue".
  7. present: The device location is "Fourth Street and Conley Avenue".
  8. present: The device location is "Fourth Street and Conley Avenue".
  9. present: The device location is "Fourth Street and Conley Avenue".
  10. present: The device location is given as "Fourth Street and Conley Avenue".
  11. present: The device location is given as "Fourth Street and Conley Avenue".
  12. present: The device location is given as "Fourth Street and Conley Avenue".
  13. present: It gives "Fourth Street and Conley Avenue" as the location.
  14. present: The device location is given as "Fourth Street and Conley Avenue".
  15. present: The device location is given as "Fourth Street and Conley Avenue".
  16. present: The device was found "at Fourth Street and Conley Avenue".
  17. present: The device was found "at Fourth Street and Conley Avenue", a named intersection.
  18. present: The device location is given as "Fourth Street and Conley Avenue".
  19. present: The device location is "Fourth Street and Conley Avenue."
  20. present: The object is located "at Fourth Street and Conley Avenue".
  21. present: The device location is given as "Fourth Street and Conley Avenue".
  22. present: The device was found "at Fourth Street and Conley Avenue".
  23. present: The device was found "at Fourth Street and Conley Avenue", a named intersection.
  24. present: The device is located "at Fourth Street and Conley Avenue".
  25. present: The device was found "at Fourth Street and Conley Avenue".
• Guidancepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  Present by 25 of 25. The alert issues the explicit protective order "Evacuate or stay away from area", with police responding and an update promised.

  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 orders recipients to "Evacuate or stay away from area".
  2. present: It orders recipients to "Evacuate or stay away from area".
  3. present: It instructs recipients to "Evacuate or stay away from area".
  4. present: It directs readers to "Evacuate or stay away from area".
  5. present: Recipients are told to "Evacuate or stay away from area".
  6. present: It instructs recipients to "Evacuate or stay away from area".
  7. present: It orders recipients to "Evacuate or stay away from area."
  8. present: It instructs readers to "Evacuate or stay away from area".
  9. present: It instructs readers to "Evacuate or stay away from area."
  10. present: Recipients are told to "Evacuate or stay away from area."
  11. present: It orders recipients to "Evacuate or stay away from area".
  12. present: It instructs readers to "Evacuate or stay away from area."
  13. present: It instructs recipients to "Evacuate or stay away from area".
  14. present: Recipients are told to "Evacuate or stay away from area" while police respond.
  15. present: It instructs recipients to "Evacuate or stay away from area".
  16. present: It instructs recipients to "Evacuate or stay away from area".
  17. present: Recipients are told to "Evacuate or stay away from area", an explicit protective action.
  18. present: It instructs readers to "Evacuate or stay away from area".
  19. present: It instructs people to "Evacuate or stay away from area."
  20. present: It instructs recipients to "Evacuate or stay away from area", a clear protective action.
  21. present: It directs recipients to "Evacuate or stay away from area", an explicit protective action.
  22. present: It directs people to "Evacuate or stay away from area".
  23. present: It instructs "Evacuate or stay away from area", an explicit protective action.
  24. present: It instructs recipients to "Evacuate or stay away from area".
  25. present: Recipients are told to "Evacuate or stay away from area".
• Timepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  Present by 25 of 25. The initial alert is stamped 9:30 a.m. and the all clear 9:35 a.m. on Oct. 26, 2020, documenting a five minute resolution.

  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 initial alert is stamped "9:30 a.m." with the all clear at "9:35 a.m." on Oct. 26, 2020.
  2. present: The two entries are stamped 9:30 and 9:35 a.m. on Oct. 26, 2020.
  3. present: The initial message is stamped 9:30 a.m. and the all clear 9:35 a.m. on Oct. 26, 2020.
  4. present: The two entries are stamped "9:30 a.m." and "9:35 a.m." on Oct. 26, 2020.
  5. present: The two messages are stamped 9:30 a.m. and 9:35 a.m. on Oct. 26.
  6. present: The initial alert is at 9:30 a.m. and the all clear at 9:35 a.m. on Oct. 26, 2020.
  7. present: Both messages carry clock times, 9:30 a.m. and 9:35 a.m. on Oct. 26, 2020.
  8. present: The two entries are stamped 9:30 a.m. and 9:35 a.m. on Oct. 26, 2020.
  9. present: The two updates are stamped 9:30 a.m. and 9:35 a.m. on Oct. 26, 2020.
  10. present: The initial alert is stamped 9:30 a.m. and the all clear 9:35 a.m. on Oct. 26, 2020.
  11. present: The initial message is stamped 9:30 a.m. and the all clear 9:35 a.m.
  12. present: The initial message is stamped 9:30 a.m. and the all clear 9:35 a.m.
  13. present: The two entries are stamped 9:30 a.m. and 9:35 a.m. on Oct. 26, 2020.
  14. present: Two stamped entries, 9:30 a.m. and 9:35 a.m., on Oct. 26, 2020.
  15. present: The initial alert is timed 9:30 a.m. and the all clear 9:35 a.m.
  16. present: The messages are stamped 9:30 a.m. and 9:35 a.m. on Oct. 26, 2020.
  17. present: The two messages are stamped "9:30 a.m." and "9:35 a.m." on Oct. 26, 2020.
  18. present: The alert is stamped 9:30 a.m. with the all clear at 9:35 a.m. on October 26, 2020.
  19. present: The initial message is stamped "9:30 a.m." and the all clear "9:35 a.m." on Oct. 26, 2020.
  20. present: The two messages are stamped "9:30 a.m." and "9:35 a.m." on Oct. 26, 2020.
  21. present: The initial alert is stamped 9:30 a.m. and the all clear 9:35 a.m. on Oct. 26, 2020.
  22. present: The two updates are stamped 9:30 a.m. and 9:35 a.m. on Oct. 26, 2020.
  23. present: The initial alert is timed 9:30 a.m. and the all clear 9:35 a.m. on Oct. 26, 2020.
  24. present: Two timed entries, 9:30 a.m. and the 9:35 a.m. all clear on Oct. 26, 2020.
  25. present: The two updates are stamped 9:30 a.m. and 9:35 a.m. on Oct. 26, 2020.
• Impactabsent0/25

  Final assessment

  Absent by 0 of 25. The only severity wording, "There is no threat to campus", rules danger out after the fact; nothing before it described blast risk or what the device could do.

  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: The only severity wording, "There is no threat to campus", rules risk out instead of describing it.
  2. absent: No blast risk or degree of danger is described before the all clear.
  3. absent: It never says what an explosion could do, and the update denies any threat to campus.
  4. absent: It never says what an explosion could do, and concludes there is no threat.
  5. absent: No statement describes what an explosion could do or how serious the risk was.
  6. absent: It does not say what a detonation could do or how dangerous the situation would be.
  7. absent: No potential blast effect or danger level is described, and the follow up says there was no threat.
  8. absent: It gives no sense of blast danger, and concludes there was no threat.
  9. absent: No statement describes what an explosion would do; the follow up says there was no threat.
  10. absent: No potential effect of an explosion is described; it later says there is no threat.
  11. absent: No line describes blast danger or how serious the suspected device could be.
  12. absent: No potential effect of a device is described, and the follow up says there is no threat.
  13. absent: No statement describes blast potential or how dangerous the suspected device might be.
  14. absent: No statement of blast risk or severity appears before the all clear.
  15. absent: No statement describes what an explosion could do or how dangerous the object is.
  16. absent: No blast risk or potential harm is described before the all clear cancels the concern.
  17. absent: No potential harm is described, and the update says there is "no threat to campus".
  18. absent: No blast risk or potential injury is described, only that police were responding.
  19. absent: No statement describes blast danger or how serious the threat could be.
  20. absent: No statement of blast danger or severity appears; the follow up says there is no threat.
  21. absent: No statement of blast danger or potential harm appears, and it proved not to be a device.
  22. absent: No blast risk or severity is described before the all clear declares no threat.
  23. absent: It never states what an explosion could do, and concludes there was no threat.
  24. absent: No statement of what an explosion could do accompanies the evacuation order.
  25. absent: No wording describes blast risk or how dangerous the suspected device might be.