about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #3,469 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Popularity of the first name Lisette and the second variable is Air pollution in Austin.  The chart goes from 1980 to 2022, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

The name Lisette has a unique way of being pronounced that requires an excessive amount of air to be expelled, contributing to poor air quality. As the popularity of the name Lisette decreased, there was a noticeable reduction in Lisette-induced air pollution. It seems like the city of Austin can now breathe a little easier, thanks to this unexpected linguistic shift.

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image of a bustling street in Austin at dusk, where a glitch art style is used to depict a vibrant sign prominently displaying "Welcome to Austin, Texas - Home of Live Music Capital of the World". The scene includes a row of cars emitting exaggerated, surreal exhaust fumes, contributing to a glitchy depiction of air pollution. The crowd is depicted in disjointed, fragmented forms, with a group of friends conversing animatedly and one person, named Lisette, smiling amid the dynamic atmosphere. The glitch art style adds an otherworldly, electric energy to the familiar urban setting. The depiction should include only scenes, people, and objects, it should not include text or speech bubbles.
This image generation prompt was also generated by AI, using the following sequence:

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You select one of a few potential scene descriptors that seems to go along with the variables described. You respond only with the scene descriptions provided and say nothing else.
User prompt: Here are two variables: Popularity of the first name Lisette and Air pollution in Austin. Given these, which of the following image style descriptions seems most appropriate? Pick the one that seems to be related to one of the variables at hand. Please respond with only one of the following potential descriptions: Woodblock painting Glitch art Sci-fi fantacy Vaporwave Glitch art
ChatGPT: Glitch art

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You describe simple visual scenes that depict the two variables stated. You combine both variables into one scene.
User prompt: Please describe a visual scene that prominently depicts both Popularity of the first name Lisette and Air pollution in Austin, in the following situation: because as the name Lisette grew in popularity, more and more people moved to Austin to be closer to the "live music capital of the world." The increase in population led to more cars on the road, contributing to higher levels of air pollution in the area.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a bustling street of Austin, a vibrant sign reads "Welcome to Austin, Texas - Home of Live Music Capital of the World." On the street, a row of cars is visible, with their exhaust fumes visibly rising into the air, causing air pollution. Among the crowds, a group of friends chats excitedly, and one person named Lisette smiles as she takes in the lively atmosphere.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You write and improve image generation prompts for DALLE-3. You maintain the same subjects, but enhance the visuals.
User prompt: Please respond with an image generation prompt that would be likely to create an interesting visual using DALLE-3, using the following style: [ Glitch art ] and depicting this scene: In a bustling street of Austin, a vibrant sign reads "Welcome to Austin, Texas - Home of Live Music Capital of the World." On the street, a row of cars is visible, with their exhaust fumes visibly rising into the air, causing air pollution. Among the crowds, a group of friends chats excitedly, and one person named Lisette smiles as she takes in the lively atmosphere. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image of a bustling street in Austin at dusk, where a glitch art style is used to depict a vibrant sign prominently displaying "Welcome to Austin, Texas - Home of Live Music Capital of the World". The scene includes a row of cars emitting exaggerated, surreal exhaust fumes, contributing to a glitchy depiction of air pollution. The crowd is depicted in disjointed, fragmented forms, with a group of friends conversing animatedly and one person, named Lisette, smiling amid the dynamic atmosphere. The glitch art style adds an otherworldly, electric energy to the familiar urban setting.

*Variations in the User Prompts from chart to chart are just the result of random number generation in Python. I wrote a few arrays of various styles and methods to ask questions to change up the results. Every time this site writes an explanation or generates an image, the script picks from each at random.

I sequence the requests into multiple prompts because I find GPT 3.5 to perform much better with short, well-managed contexts. Thus, I track the context directly in Python and only ask ChatGPT targeted questions.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 (fine-tuned)
System prompt: You provide humorous responses in the form of plausible sounding explanations for correlations. You assume the correlation is causative for the purpose of the explanation even if it is ridiculous. You do not chat with the user, you only reply with the causal connection explanation and nothing else.
User prompt: Please make up a funny explanation for how a decrease in Popularity of the first name Lisette caused Air pollution in Austin to decrease. Include one good pun.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Breathing Easy or Wheezing Lisettes? Investigating the Link Between the Popularity of the Name Lisette and Air Pollution in Austin

Journal of Environmental Epidemiology and Ecological Studies

Jan 2024

Reminder: This paper is AI-generated. Not real!
Quick note: This sequence is long and repetitive. That's how the prompt engineering works for this one. I manage the output in Python to format it into this PDF.




Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You write titles and abstracts of goofy academic research papers.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, and add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Lisette and Air pollution in Austin. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Make the title seem clever.

Your research team used data from US Social Security Administration and Environmental Protection Agency to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.7355163 and p < 0.01 for 1980 to 2022.

Please respond in this format (replace "Lorem ipsum dolor sit" with your title and abstract)

[[TITLE]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit

[[ABSTRACT]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit



ChatGPT:
[[TITLE]]
Breathing Easy or Wheezing Lisettes? Investigating the Link Between the Popularity of the Name Lisette and Air Pollution in Austin

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study set out to investigate the curious relationship between the popularity of the first name Lisette and air pollution levels in Austin, Texas. Drawing upon data from the US Social Security Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency, we sought to determine if there was a correlation between the two seemingly unrelated factors. Our findings revealed a surprising correlation coefficient of 0.7355163, with a p-value of less than 0.01, for the time period from 1980 to 2022. The results imply a rather unexpected link between the ebb and flow of Lisettes in Austin and the corresponding air quality levels. While it is yet to be determined if Lisettes are driving air pollution or responding to it, this study sheds light on a quirky relationship that begs for further investigation. So next time you find yourself in the Lone Star State pondering the air quality, don't forget to consider the Lisettes too!


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft the introduction section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Lisette and Air pollution in Austin. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Breathing Easy or Wheezing Lisettes? Investigating the Link Between the Popularity of the Name Lisette and Air Pollution in Austin

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study set out to investigate the curious relationship between the popularity of the first name Lisette and air pollution levels in Austin, Texas. Drawing upon data from the US Social Security Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency, we sought to determine if there was a correlation between the two seemingly unrelated factors. Our findings revealed a surprising correlation coefficient of 0.7355163, with a p-value of less than 0.01, for the time period from 1980 to 2022. The results imply a rather unexpected link between the ebb and flow of Lisettes in Austin and the corresponding air quality levels. While it is yet to be determined if Lisettes are driving air pollution or responding to it, this study sheds light on a quirky relationship that begs for further investigation. So next time you find yourself in the Lone Star State pondering the air quality, don't forget to consider the Lisettes too!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

The confluence of seemingly unrelated variables has long been a source of fascination in scientific inquiry. From the color of socks to the flavor of ice cream, researchers have delved into all manners of peculiar connections. And now, adding to this delightful list of enigmatic associations, we present our investigation into the correlation between the popularity of the first name Lisette and air pollution levels in the ever-charming city of Austin, Texas.

In the whimsical world of statistical analysis, where hard data meets wild speculation, we found ourselves captivated by the possibility of a link between the ebb and flow of Lisettes and the corresponding air quality in the capital city. The idea sprouted like a quirky hybrid of scientific curiosity and a whimsical flight of fantasy—a cocktail, if you will, of empirical data and a dash of absurdity.

As we embarked on our quest to uncover the mysterious relationship between Lisettes and pollution, we were acutely aware of the potential for incredulity. However, armed with the irresistible allure of statistical analysis and an unabashed sense of scientific adventure, we delved into the labyrinthine depths of demographic records and air quality data, ready to confront the unexpected and embrace the whimsical.

Perhaps the mere mention of "Lisette" conjures images of pristine air and pristine individuals, breathing in the fragrant, pollution-free breezes. Or perhaps, in a more mischievous turn, "Lisette" and "pollution" might appear to be strange bedfellows, dancing a statistical tango that leaves researchers scratching their heads in bemusement.

In this light, the pursuit of understanding the connection between the popularity of the name Lisette and the quality of Austin's air embodies the best of scientific curiosity and statistical playfulness. So, prepare to immerse yourself in the tantalizing tale of Lisettes and air pollution, where the lines between probability and possibility blur and the unexpected awaits at every turn.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft a literature review section of an academic research paper, that starts out dry for the first few sentences but then becomes hilarious and goofy.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Lisette and Air pollution in Austin. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Speak in the present tense for this section (the authors find...), as is common in academic research paper literature reviews. Name the sources in a format similar to this: In "Book," the authors find lorem and ipsum.

Make up the lorem and ipsum part, but make it sound related to the topic at hand.

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then cite some social media posts you read that seem to be related.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Breathing Easy or Wheezing Lisettes? Investigating the Link Between the Popularity of the Name Lisette and Air Pollution in Austin

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study set out to investigate the curious relationship between the popularity of the first name Lisette and air pollution levels in Austin, Texas. Drawing upon data from the US Social Security Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency, we sought to determine if there was a correlation between the two seemingly unrelated factors. Our findings revealed a surprising correlation coefficient of 0.7355163, with a p-value of less than 0.01, for the time period from 1980 to 2022. The results imply a rather unexpected link between the ebb and flow of Lisettes in Austin and the corresponding air quality levels. While it is yet to be determined if Lisettes are driving air pollution or responding to it, this study sheds light on a quirky relationship that begs for further investigation. So next time you find yourself in the Lone Star State pondering the air quality, don't forget to consider the Lisettes too!

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The confluence of seemingly unrelated variables has long been a source of fascination in scientific inquiry. From the color of socks to the flavor of ice cream, researchers have delved into all manners of peculiar connections. And now, adding to this delightful list of enigmatic associations, we present our investigation into the correlation between the popularity of the first name Lisette and air pollution levels in the ever-charming city of Austin, Texas.
In the whimsical world of statistical analysis, where hard data meets wild speculation, we found ourselves captivated by the possibility of a link between the ebb and flow of Lisettes and the corresponding air quality in the capital city. The idea sprouted like a quirky hybrid of scientific curiosity and a whimsical flight of fantasy—a cocktail, if you will, of empirical data and a dash of absurdity.
As we embarked on our quest to uncover the mysterious relationship between Lisettes and pollution, we were acutely aware of the potential for incredulity. However, armed with the irresistible allure of statistical analysis and an unabashed sense of scientific adventure, we delved into the labyrinthine depths of demographic records and air quality data, ready to confront the unexpected and embrace the whimsical.
Perhaps the mere mention of "Lisette" conjures images of pristine air and pristine individuals, breathing in the fragrant, pollution-free breezes. Or perhaps, in a more mischievous turn, "Lisette" and "pollution" might appear to be strange bedfellows, dancing a statistical tango that leaves researchers scratching their heads in bemusement.
In this light, the pursuit of understanding the connection between the popularity of the name Lisette and the quality of Austin's air embodies the best of scientific curiosity and statistical playfulness. So, prepare to immerse yourself in the tantalizing tale of Lisettes and air pollution, where the lines between probability and possibility blur and the unexpected awaits at every turn.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The present literature review aims to investigate existing research and writings pertinent to the curious relationship between the popularity of the first name Lisette and air pollution in Austin, Texas. To begin, Smith et al. in "Trends in Socially Correlated Names and Environmental Conditions" expound upon the potential impact of cultural phenomena on environmental variables, elucidating the theoretical underpinnings of our current investigation.

Doe and Jones, in their analysis titled "Aerosol and Appellations," delve into the intersection of demographic trends and air quality, offering valuable insights into the potential interactions between personal nomenclature and atmospheric conditions. The juxtaposition of these serious scholarly works with our current investigation sets the stage for a whimsical inquiry into an unexpected and perhaps humorous correlation.

Transitioning to related non-fiction literature, it is important to consider works such as "The Air We Breathe: A Comprehensive Analysis of Urban Air Quality" by Environmentalist Expert, which presents a comprehensive overview of air pollution in urban environments. While not explicitly addressing the peculiar connection between personal names and environmental factors, such literature provides a necessary backdrop for contextualizing our investigation.

On a less conventional note, fiction books such as "The Name Effect: A Tale of Atmospheric Anomalies" by Author Imaginative and "Pollution and the Peculiar Case of Lisette: A Novel Statistical Mystery" by Statistical Sleuth offer entertaining narratives that weave the whimsical connection between personal names and air pollution into imaginative storylines. While definitely not part of the scholarly canon, these works provide a lighthearted, if somewhat unconventional, perspective on our investigation.

Furthermore, in the realm of social media discourse, a recent tweet by @AirQualityEnthusiast pondering, "Could the rise of Lisettes in Austin be contributing to the worsening air quality? #StatsMystery," serves as a prime example of public fascination with the curious correlation we aim to explore. Meanwhile, an Instagram post from @NameEnigma juxtaposing images of air pollution with a chart of Lisette's popularity over the years reflects the broader public intrigue with the potential connection between personal names and atmospheric conditions.

Thus, the literature reviewed provides a comprehensive backdrop for our investigation into the correlation between the popularity of the first name Lisette and air pollution in Austin, offering both serious and lighthearted perspectives that enrich our understanding of this peculiar yet captivating relationship.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft the methodology section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Lisette and Air pollution in Austin. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from US Social Security Administration and Environmental Protection Agency . You used data from 1980 to 2022

Make up the research methods you don't know. Make them a bit goofy and convoluted.

Here is the title, abstract, and introduction of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Breathing Easy or Wheezing Lisettes? Investigating the Link Between the Popularity of the Name Lisette and Air Pollution in Austin

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study set out to investigate the curious relationship between the popularity of the first name Lisette and air pollution levels in Austin, Texas. Drawing upon data from the US Social Security Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency, we sought to determine if there was a correlation between the two seemingly unrelated factors. Our findings revealed a surprising correlation coefficient of 0.7355163, with a p-value of less than 0.01, for the time period from 1980 to 2022. The results imply a rather unexpected link between the ebb and flow of Lisettes in Austin and the corresponding air quality levels. While it is yet to be determined if Lisettes are driving air pollution or responding to it, this study sheds light on a quirky relationship that begs for further investigation. So next time you find yourself in the Lone Star State pondering the air quality, don't forget to consider the Lisettes too!

[[INTRODUCTION]]
The confluence of seemingly unrelated variables has long been a source of fascination in scientific inquiry. From the color of socks to the flavor of ice cream, researchers have delved into all manners of peculiar connections. And now, adding to this delightful list of enigmatic associations, we present our investigation into the correlation between the popularity of the first name Lisette and air pollution levels in the ever-charming city of Austin, Texas.
In the whimsical world of statistical analysis, where hard data meets wild speculation, we found ourselves captivated by the possibility of a link between the ebb and flow of Lisettes and the corresponding air quality in the capital city. The idea sprouted like a quirky hybrid of scientific curiosity and a whimsical flight of fantasy—a cocktail, if you will, of empirical data and a dash of absurdity.
As we embarked on our quest to uncover the mysterious relationship between Lisettes and pollution, we were acutely aware of the potential for incredulity. However, armed with the irresistible allure of statistical analysis and an unabashed sense of scientific adventure, we delved into the labyrinthine depths of demographic records and air quality data, ready to confront the unexpected and embrace the whimsical.
Perhaps the mere mention of "Lisette" conjures images of pristine air and pristine individuals, breathing in the fragrant, pollution-free breezes. Or perhaps, in a more mischievous turn, "Lisette" and "pollution" might appear to be strange bedfellows, dancing a statistical tango that leaves researchers scratching their heads in bemusement.
In this light, the pursuit of understanding the connection between the popularity of the name Lisette and the quality of Austin's air embodies the best of scientific curiosity and statistical playfulness. So, prepare to immerse yourself in the tantalizing tale of Lisettes and air pollution, where the lines between probability and possibility blur and the unexpected awaits at every turn.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

Our research team embarked on a whimsical and slightly zany journey to unravel the mysterious connection between the popularity of the first name Lisette and air pollution levels in the quirky city of Austin, Texas. Drawing upon an array of data sources, we navigated our way through the data landscape with the glee of treasure hunters on a quest for scientific amusement.

Data Collection:
To uncover the fluctuating popularity of the name Lisette, we mined the treasure trove of the U.S. Social Security Administration database, sifting through decades of birth records with the fervor of detectives on a curious caper. Our team assembled the temporal trends of Lisettes, mapping their rise and fall with the zeal of intrepid explorers charting unknown territories.

Simultaneously, to gauge the ambient air pollution levels, we turned to the Environmental Protection Agency's repository of atmospheric measures, feeling like alchemists seeking to transmute carbon emissions into nuggets of statistical gold. Armed with a treasure map of data from 1980 to 2022, we endeavored to uncover the whimsical dance between Lisettes and air pollutants.

Data Analysis:
With our captivating data in hand, we cast a wide net of statistical analysis, weaving the enchanting threads of correlation and regression to illuminate the subtle interplay of Lisettes and air quality. Our statistical tools shimmered like fairy lights as we tamed the wild gazes of scatterplots and danced with the elusive specter of significance testing.

We harnessed the power of Pearson correlation coefficients to capture the enchanting rapport between Lisettes and air pollution, assembling a complex lattice of statistical scrutiny that sparkled like a tapestry of science and whimsy. Our regression models swirled like elaborate mazes, leading us down convolution after convolution in an exhilarating pursuit of understanding this peculiar correlation.

Furthermore, we employed time series analyses to unravel the temporal chicanery of Lisettes and air pollution, peering into the intricate tapestry of time with the anticipation of unearthing a comic twist in the data.

In the end, through this fanciful blend of data collection and statistical reverie, we sought to uncover the unlikely connection between the ebb and flow of Lisettes and the whimsical whims of air pollution in the endearing city of Austin, Texas.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft the results section of an academic research paper. You speak in the past tense (you found...).
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Lisette and Air pollution in Austin. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from US Social Security Administration and Environmental Protection Agency .

For the time period 1980 to 2022, you found a correlation 0.7355163, r-squared of 0.5409842, and p < 0.01.

One figure will be included. The figure (Fig. 1) is a scatterplot showing the strong correlation between the two variables. You don't need to specify where; I will add the figure.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Breathing Easy or Wheezing Lisettes? Investigating the Link Between the Popularity of the Name Lisette and Air Pollution in Austin

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study set out to investigate the curious relationship between the popularity of the first name Lisette and air pollution levels in Austin, Texas. Drawing upon data from the US Social Security Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency, we sought to determine if there was a correlation between the two seemingly unrelated factors. Our findings revealed a surprising correlation coefficient of 0.7355163, with a p-value of less than 0.01, for the time period from 1980 to 2022. The results imply a rather unexpected link between the ebb and flow of Lisettes in Austin and the corresponding air quality levels. While it is yet to be determined if Lisettes are driving air pollution or responding to it, this study sheds light on a quirky relationship that begs for further investigation. So next time you find yourself in the Lone Star State pondering the air quality, don't forget to consider the Lisettes too!

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
The confluence of seemingly unrelated variables has long been a source of fascination in scientific inquiry. From the color of socks to the flavor of ice cream, researchers have delved into all manners of peculiar connections. And now, adding to this delightful list of enigmatic associations, we present our investigation into the correlation between the popularity of the first name Lisette and air pollution levels in the ever-charming city of Austin, Texas.
In the whimsical world of statistical analysis, where hard data meets wild speculation, we found ourselves captivated by the possibility of a link between the ebb and flow of Lisettes and the corresponding air quality in the capital city. The idea sprouted like a quirky hybrid of scientific curiosity and a whimsical flight of fantasy—a cocktail, if you will, of empirical data and a dash of absurdity.
As we embarked on our quest to uncover the mysterious relationship between Lisettes and pollution, we were acutely aware of the potential for incredulity. However, armed with the irresistible allure of statistical analysis and an unabashed sense of scientific adventure, we delved into the labyrinthine depths of demographic records and air quality data, ready to confront the unexpected and embrace the whimsical.
Perhaps the mere mention of "Lisette" conjures images of pristine air and pristine individuals, breathing in the fragrant, pollution-free breezes. Or perhaps, in a more mischievous turn, "Lisette" and "pollution" might appear to be strange bedfellows, dancing a statistical tango that leaves researchers scratching their heads in bemusement.
In this light, the pursuit of understanding the connection between the popularity of the name Lisette and the quality of Austin's air embodies the best of scientific curiosity and statistical playfulness. So, prepare to immerse yourself in the tantalizing tale of Lisettes and air pollution, where the lines between probability and possibility blur and the unexpected awaits at every turn.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The analysis of the collected data revealed a surprising and robust correlation between the popularity of the first name Lisette and air pollution levels in Austin, Texas. For the time period from 1980 to 2022, the correlation coefficient between the two variables was calculated to be 0.7355163, indicating a moderately strong positive relationship. This suggests that as the popularity of the name Lisette fluctuated over the years, so too did the levels of air pollution in the city of Austin.

Furthermore, the coefficient of determination (r-squared) was found to be 0.5409842, signifying that approximately 54% of the variability in air pollution levels in Austin can be explained by the variability in the popularity of the name Lisette. It's as if the ebb and flow of Lisettes in the city has a significant influence on the atmospheric ebb and flow!

The obtained p-value of less than 0.01 provides strong evidence against the null hypothesis of no correlation, further bolstering the validity of the observed relationship. In other words, the likelihood of observing such a strong correlation between Lisettes and air pollution by sheer chance is less than 1 in 100, reinforcing the significance of the findings.

The scatterplot (Fig. 1) visually illustrates the strong positive correlation between the popularity of the name Lisette and air pollution levels in Austin. The points on the plot form a discernible upward trend, with increases in Lisette popularity coinciding with higher levels of air pollution, and vice versa. It's as if the very mention of "Lisette" in Austin's air has a magical effect on pollution levels, magnetically attracting them to fluctuate in symphony.

These findings shed light on an intriguing and unexpected correlation that challenges conventional wisdom. The implications of this study extend beyond the realm of statistical curiosity, potentially paving the way for further investigations into the underlying mechanisms driving this curious connection. It leaves us pondering – are Lisettes unwittingly contributing to air pollution, or are they simply responding to the atmospheric conditions in a statistically significant way? This study not only brings new meaning to the phrase "taking a breath of fresh air," but also invites future research to unpack the whimsical tale of Lisettes and air pollution.



Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft the discussion section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Lisette and Air pollution in Austin. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Limit your response to 500 tokens.

Here are the title, abstract, literature review, and results sections. Please harken back to 1-2 of the goofy items in the literature review, but pretend to take them completely seriously. Discuss how your results supported the prior research.

Do not write a conclusion. I will add a conclusion after this.

[[TITLE]]
Breathing Easy or Wheezing Lisettes? Investigating the Link Between the Popularity of the Name Lisette and Air Pollution in Austin

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study set out to investigate the curious relationship between the popularity of the first name Lisette and air pollution levels in Austin, Texas. Drawing upon data from the US Social Security Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency, we sought to determine if there was a correlation between the two seemingly unrelated factors. Our findings revealed a surprising correlation coefficient of 0.7355163, with a p-value of less than 0.01, for the time period from 1980 to 2022. The results imply a rather unexpected link between the ebb and flow of Lisettes in Austin and the corresponding air quality levels. While it is yet to be determined if Lisettes are driving air pollution or responding to it, this study sheds light on a quirky relationship that begs for further investigation. So next time you find yourself in the Lone Star State pondering the air quality, don't forget to consider the Lisettes too!

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The present literature review aims to investigate existing research and writings pertinent to the curious relationship between the popularity of the first name Lisette and air pollution in Austin, Texas. To begin, Smith et al. in "Trends in Socially Correlated Names and Environmental Conditions" expound upon the potential impact of cultural phenomena on environmental variables, elucidating the theoretical underpinnings of our current investigation.
Doe and Jones, in their analysis titled "Aerosol and Appellations," delve into the intersection of demographic trends and air quality, offering valuable insights into the potential interactions between personal nomenclature and atmospheric conditions. The juxtaposition of these serious scholarly works with our current investigation sets the stage for a whimsical inquiry into an unexpected and perhaps humorous correlation.
Transitioning to related non-fiction literature, it is important to consider works such as "The Air We Breathe: A Comprehensive Analysis of Urban Air Quality" by Environmentalist Expert, which presents a comprehensive overview of air pollution in urban environments. While not explicitly addressing the peculiar connection between personal names and environmental factors, such literature provides a necessary backdrop for contextualizing our investigation.
On a less conventional note, fiction books such as "The Name Effect: A Tale of Atmospheric Anomalies" by Author Imaginative and "Pollution and the Peculiar Case of Lisette: A Novel Statistical Mystery" by Statistical Sleuth offer entertaining narratives that weave the whimsical connection between personal names and air pollution into imaginative storylines. While definitely not part of the scholarly canon, these works provide a lighthearted, if somewhat unconventional, perspective on our investigation.
Furthermore, in the realm of social media discourse, a recent tweet by @AirQualityEnthusiast pondering, "Could the rise of Lisettes in Austin be contributing to the worsening air quality? #StatsMystery," serves as a prime example of public fascination with the curious correlation we aim to explore. Meanwhile, an Instagram post from @NameEnigma juxtaposing images of air pollution with a chart of Lisette's popularity over the years reflects the broader public intrigue with the potential connection between personal names and atmospheric conditions.
Thus, the literature reviewed provides a comprehensive backdrop for our investigation into the correlation between the popularity of the first name Lisette and air pollution in Austin, offering both serious and lighthearted perspectives that enrich our understanding of this peculiar yet captivating relationship.

[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of the collected data revealed a surprising and robust correlation between the popularity of the first name Lisette and air pollution levels in Austin, Texas. For the time period from 1980 to 2022, the correlation coefficient between the two variables was calculated to be 0.7355163, indicating a moderately strong positive relationship. This suggests that as the popularity of the name Lisette fluctuated over the years, so too did the levels of air pollution in the city of Austin.
Furthermore, the coefficient of determination (r-squared) was found to be 0.5409842, signifying that approximately 54% of the variability in air pollution levels in Austin can be explained by the variability in the popularity of the name Lisette. It's as if the ebb and flow of Lisettes in the city has a significant influence on the atmospheric ebb and flow!
The obtained p-value of less than 0.01 provides strong evidence against the null hypothesis of no correlation, further bolstering the validity of the observed relationship. In other words, the likelihood of observing such a strong correlation between Lisettes and air pollution by sheer chance is less than 1 in 100, reinforcing the significance of the findings.
The scatterplot (Fig. 1) visually illustrates the strong positive correlation between the popularity of the name Lisette and air pollution levels in Austin. The points on the plot form a discernible upward trend, with increases in Lisette popularity coinciding with higher levels of air pollution, and vice versa. It's as if the very mention of "Lisette" in Austin's air has a magical effect on pollution levels, magnetically attracting them to fluctuate in symphony.
These findings shed light on an intriguing and unexpected correlation that challenges conventional wisdom. The implications of this study extend beyond the realm of statistical curiosity, potentially paving the way for further investigations into the underlying mechanisms driving this curious connection. It leaves us pondering – are Lisettes unwittingly contributing to air pollution, or are they simply responding to the atmospheric conditions in a statistically significant way? This study not only brings new meaning to the phrase "taking a breath of fresh air," but also invites future research to unpack the whimsical tale of Lisettes and air pollution.


-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The results of our study reveal a rather unexpected but undeniably robust correlation between the popularity of the name Lisette and air pollution levels in Austin, Texas. It seems that Lisettes and air pollution are dancing a statistical tango, with one's popularity influencing the other's presence in a whimsical and intriguing manner. As we delve into the implications of these findings, it is essential to recall the lighthearted and seemingly fanciful literature review that brought us to this point.

The serious scholarly works by Smith et al. and Doe and Jones, which we irreverently acknowledged in the literature review, resonate with our current findings. It is as if the theories and concepts expounded in these scholarly pieces have manifested themselves in the form of a statistical rom-com between Lisettes and air pollution in Austin. The jesting juxtaposition we previously made now seems eerily prescient, as our results undeniably support the idea that personal nomenclature and atmospheric conditions are more entangled than one might have ever imagined.

Speaking of whimsical literature, the amusing narratives in "The Name Effect" and "Pollution and the Peculiar Case of Lisette" suddenly don't appear quite as far-fetched. In fact, they now seem to foreshadow the statistical revelation we have uncovered – a veritable statistical mystery that has captured the imagination of not only academia but also the broader public.

The significant correlation coefficient and p-value we obtained unequivocally debunk any lingering doubts about the legitimacy of the Lisette-air pollution connection. This statistically significant relationship invites a reimagining of the traditional research landscape, entertaining the notion that perhaps personal names do havescientific powers, albeit in the realm of correlation and not causation. Could it be that Lisettes possess an invisible aura that reverberates through the city, leaving a discernible mark on air quality levels? It might sound like a page out of a scientific fairytale, but our results certainly give it credibility!

In closing, our findings not only affirm the unexpected correlation between Lisettes and air pollution in Austin but also spark curiosity about the underlying mechanisms at play in this whimsical statistical tale. The statistical mystery of Lisettes and air pollution beckons for further exploration, offering a tantalizing opportunity to unravel the unseen threads that weave personal nomenclature into the fabric of atmospheric conditions. As we reflect on the implications of this study, it becomes clear that the scientific world might just have stumbled upon a comedic quirk of statistical fate – where the ebb and flow of air pollution seems to dance to the statistical beat of Lisettes in Austin.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft the discussion section of goofy academic research papers that sounds like it belongs based on the title and abstract provided.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Lisette and Air pollution in Austin. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Limit your response to 300 tokens. At the very end, assert that no more research is needed in this area.

Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
Breathing Easy or Wheezing Lisettes? Investigating the Link Between the Popularity of the Name Lisette and Air Pollution in Austin

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study set out to investigate the curious relationship between the popularity of the first name Lisette and air pollution levels in Austin, Texas. Drawing upon data from the US Social Security Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency, we sought to determine if there was a correlation between the two seemingly unrelated factors. Our findings revealed a surprising correlation coefficient of 0.7355163, with a p-value of less than 0.01, for the time period from 1980 to 2022. The results imply a rather unexpected link between the ebb and flow of Lisettes in Austin and the corresponding air quality levels. While it is yet to be determined if Lisettes are driving air pollution or responding to it, this study sheds light on a quirky relationship that begs for further investigation. So next time you find yourself in the Lone Star State pondering the air quality, don't forget to consider the Lisettes too!

[[INTRDUCTION]]
The confluence of seemingly unrelated variables has long been a source of fascination in scientific inquiry. From the color of socks to the flavor of ice cream, researchers have delved into all manners of peculiar connections. And now, adding to this delightful list of enigmatic associations, we present our investigation into the correlation between the popularity of the first name Lisette and air pollution levels in the ever-charming city of Austin, Texas.
In the whimsical world of statistical analysis, where hard data meets wild speculation, we found ourselves captivated by the possibility of a link between the ebb and flow of Lisettes and the corresponding air quality in the capital city. The idea sprouted like a quirky hybrid of scientific curiosity and a whimsical flight of fantasy—a cocktail, if you will, of empirical data and a dash of absurdity.
As we embarked on our quest to uncover the mysterious relationship between Lisettes and pollution, we were acutely aware of the potential for incredulity. However, armed with the irresistible allure of statistical analysis and an unabashed sense of scientific adventure, we delved into the labyrinthine depths of demographic records and air quality data, ready to confront the unexpected and embrace the whimsical.
Perhaps the mere mention of "Lisette" conjures images of pristine air and pristine individuals, breathing in the fragrant, pollution-free breezes. Or perhaps, in a more mischievous turn, "Lisette" and "pollution" might appear to be strange bedfellows, dancing a statistical tango that leaves researchers scratching their heads in bemusement.
In this light, the pursuit of understanding the connection between the popularity of the name Lisette and the quality of Austin's air embodies the best of scientific curiosity and statistical playfulness. So, prepare to immerse yourself in the tantalizing tale of Lisettes and air pollution, where the lines between probability and possibility blur and the unexpected awaits at every turn.

[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of the collected data revealed a surprising and robust correlation between the popularity of the first name Lisette and air pollution levels in Austin, Texas. For the time period from 1980 to 2022, the correlation coefficient between the two variables was calculated to be 0.7355163, indicating a moderately strong positive relationship. This suggests that as the popularity of the name Lisette fluctuated over the years, so too did the levels of air pollution in the city of Austin.
Furthermore, the coefficient of determination (r-squared) was found to be 0.5409842, signifying that approximately 54% of the variability in air pollution levels in Austin can be explained by the variability in the popularity of the name Lisette. It's as if the ebb and flow of Lisettes in the city has a significant influence on the atmospheric ebb and flow!
The obtained p-value of less than 0.01 provides strong evidence against the null hypothesis of no correlation, further bolstering the validity of the observed relationship. In other words, the likelihood of observing such a strong correlation between Lisettes and air pollution by sheer chance is less than 1 in 100, reinforcing the significance of the findings.
The scatterplot (Fig. 1) visually illustrates the strong positive correlation between the popularity of the name Lisette and air pollution levels in Austin. The points on the plot form a discernible upward trend, with increases in Lisette popularity coinciding with higher levels of air pollution, and vice versa. It's as if the very mention of "Lisette" in Austin's air has a magical effect on pollution levels, magnetically attracting them to fluctuate in symphony.
These findings shed light on an intriguing and unexpected correlation that challenges conventional wisdom. The implications of this study extend beyond the realm of statistical curiosity, potentially paving the way for further investigations into the underlying mechanisms driving this curious connection. It leaves us pondering – are Lisettes unwittingly contributing to air pollution, or are they simply responding to the atmospheric conditions in a statistically significant way? This study not only brings new meaning to the phrase "taking a breath of fresh air," but also invites future research to unpack the whimsical tale of Lisettes and air pollution.


-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our research has unveiled a curious connection between the fluctuating popularity of the name Lisette and the oscillating levels of air pollution in the captivating city of Austin, Texas. The correlation coefficient of 0.7355163 stands as a shining example of the enigmatic dance between seemingly unrelated variables, like a scientific tango set to the rhythm of statistical significance. It's almost as if each new Lisette in town brings a breath of fresh air, or perhaps a waft of pollutants—talk about an atmospheric rollercoaster!

The coefficient of determination of 0.5409842 suggests that approximately 54% of the twists and turns in Austin's air quality can be attributed to the ebb and flow of Lisettes, as if the city's atmosphere were choreographed by the rise and fall of this whimsically named populace. It's a statistical symphony of comings and goings, where the melodies of nature and nomenclature intertwine in an elegant, if puzzling, duet.

The visual representation in the scatterplot (Fig. 1) almost paints a whimsical picture of Lisettes and pollutants engaging in a lively, albeit perplexing, waltz across the canvas of Austin's skies. Each point seems to tell a tale of whimsical coalescence, where the presence of Lisettes coincides with the atmospheric capers of pollution—a statistical ballet, if you will.

In the realm of scientific inquiry, this unexpected relationship introduces a delightful dash of whimsy. The mere mention of "Lisette" seems to elicit a zephyr of statistical intrigue, challenging researchers to unravel the whimsical enigma shrouding this correlation. It's a story ripe for the telling, an improbable twist in the chronicles of empirical discovery that captivates the imagination and tickles the fancy of statistical sensibilities.

In this light, we posit that the saga of Lisettes and air pollution in Austin, Texas, stands as an empirical anomaly deserving of its place in the annals of whimsical research. As for the perplexing question of whether Lisettes drive air pollution or merely respond to it, perhaps it's a conundrum best left to the meandering musings of statistical philosophers and whimsical statisticians under the proverbial Texan sky.

In the spirit of scientific levity, we dare to declare that the tale of Lisettes and air pollution in Austin has been spun with statistical aplomb and delightfully quirky findings. As the final curtain falls on this peculiar research endeavor, we maintain that the saga of Lisettes and air pollution in Austin begs no further investigation—it stands as a playful paragon of the improbable, a statistical labyrinth of enchanting curiosity deserving of its whimsical place in the scientific pantheon.

No further research needed in this area.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of academic journals. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding research, scientific, or academic journal that would publish a paper entited Breathing Easy or Wheezing Lisettes? Investigating the Link Between the Popularity of the Name Lisette and Air Pollution in Austin. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

Journal of Environmental Epidemiology and Ecological Studies


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of nonprofit research organizations and associations. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding nonprofit, academic, or scientific association or organization that would sponsor research that resulted in a paper entited Breathing Easy or Wheezing Lisettes? Investigating the Link Between the Popularity of the Name Lisette and Air Pollution in Austin. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Institute for Atmospheric Names and Trends


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide potential search keywords separated by commas. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide potential search keywords for a paper titled Breathing Easy or Wheezing Lisettes? Investigating the Link Between the Popularity of the Name Lisette and Air Pollution in Austin with an abstract of This study set out to investigate the curious relationship between the popularity of the first name Lisette and air pollution levels in Austin, Texas. Drawing upon data from the US Social Security Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency, we sought to determine if there was a correlation between the two seemingly unrelated factors. Our findings revealed a surprising correlation coefficient of 0.7355163, with a p-value of less than 0.01, for the time period from 1980 to 2022. The results imply a rather unexpected link between the ebb and flow of Lisettes in Austin and the corresponding air quality levels. While it is yet to be determined if Lisettes are driving air pollution or responding to it, this study sheds light on a quirky relationship that begs for further investigation. So next time you find yourself in the Lone Star State pondering the air quality, don't forget to consider the Lisettes too!

ChatGPT:

Lisette, air pollution, name popularity, correlation, US Social Security Administration, Environmental Protection Agency, Austin, Texas, correlation coefficient, p-value, air quality levels, Lone Star State

*There is a bunch of Python happening behind the scenes to turn this prompt sequence into a PDF.



Random correlation

Discover a new correlation

View all correlations

View all research papers

Report an error


Data details

Popularity of the first name Lisette
Detailed data title: Babies of all sexes born in the US named Lisette
Source: US Social Security Administration
See what else correlates with Popularity of the first name Lisette

Air pollution in Austin
Detailed data title: Percentage of days with air quality at 'unhealthy for sensitive groups' or worse in Austin-Round Rock, TX
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
See what else correlates with Air pollution in Austin

Correlation r = 0.7355163 (Pearson correlation coefficient)
Correlation is a measure of how much the variables move together. If it is 0.99, when one goes up the other goes up. If it is 0.02, the connection is very weak or non-existent. If it is -0.99, then when one goes up the other goes down. If it is 1.00, you probably messed up your correlation function.

r2 = 0.5409842 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 54.1% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Air pollution in Austin) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Popularity of the first name Lisette) over the 43 years from 1980 through 2022.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 1.9E-8. 0.0000000193007024670826530000
The p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme. More specifically the p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme if we had only tested one pair of variables one time.

But I am a p-villain. I absolutely did not test only one pair of variables one time. I correlated hundreds of millions of pairs of variables. I threw boatloads of data into an industrial-sized blender to find this correlation.

Who is going to stop me? p-value reporting doesn't require me to report how many calculations I had to go through in order to find a low p-value!
On average, you will find a correaltion as strong as 0.74 in 1.9E-6% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 51,811,586 random variables You don't actually need 51 million variables to find a correlation like this one. I don't have that many variables in my database. You can also correlate variables that are not independent. I do this a lot.

p-value calculations are useful for understanding the probability of a result happening by chance. They are most useful when used to highlight the risk of a fluke outcome. For example, if you calculate a p-value of 0.30, the risk that the result is a fluke is high. It is good to know that! But there are lots of ways to get a p-value of less than 0.01, as evidenced by this project.

In this particular case, the values are so extreme as to be meaningless. That's why no one reports p-values with specificity after they drop below 0.01.

Just to be clear: I'm being completely transparent about the calculations. There is no math trickery. This is just how statistics shakes out when you calculate hundreds of millions of random correlations.
with the same 42 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 42 because we have two variables measured over a period of 43 years. It's just the number of years minus ( the number of variables minus one ), which in this case simplifies to the number of years minus one.
you would randomly expect to find a correlation as strong as this one.

[ 0.56, 0.85 ] 95% correlation confidence interval (using the Fisher z-transformation)
The confidence interval is an estimate the range of the value of the correlation coefficient, using the correlation itself as an input. The values are meant to be the low and high end of the correlation coefficient with 95% confidence.

This one is a bit more complciated than the other calculations, but I include it because many people have been pushing for confidence intervals instead of p-value calculations (for example: NEJM. However, if you are dredging data, you can reliably find yourself in the 5%. That's my goal!


All values for the years included above: If I were being very sneaky, I could trim years from the beginning or end of the datasets to increase the correlation on some pairs of variables. I don't do that because there are already plenty of correlations in my database without monkeying with the years.

Still, sometimes one of the variables has more years of data available than the other. This page only shows the overlapping years. To see all the years, click on "See what else correlates with..." link above.
1980198119821983198419851986198719881989199019911992199319941995199619971998199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022
Popularity of the first name Lisette (Babies born)16018315714514917217117915919520018524416417416918728619539525622921417823418315312111989110816761595542412936263118
Air pollution in Austin (Bad air quality days)6.229516.542067.514453.921575.397737.202223.621177.142869.04116.301375.479454.383565.753423.01374.3835613.15072.185798.219186.8493213.15079.562843.561644.383565.479453.551914.931519.863012.191783.825141.369862.739733.835622.185791.0958902.739730.2732241.095892.465750.5479450.5464480.2739731.91781




Why this works

  1. Data dredging: I have 25,153 variables in my database. I compare all these variables against each other to find ones that randomly match up. That's 632,673,409 correlation calculations! This is called “data dredging.” Instead of starting with a hypothesis and testing it, I instead abused the data to see what correlations shake out. It’s a dangerous way to go about analysis, because any sufficiently large dataset will yield strong correlations completely at random.
  2. Lack of causal connection: There is probably Because these pages are automatically generated, it's possible that the two variables you are viewing are in fact causually related. I take steps to prevent the obvious ones from showing on the site (I don't let data about the weather in one city correlate with the weather in a neighboring city, for example), but sometimes they still pop up. If they are related, cool! You found a loophole.
    no direct connection between these variables, despite what the AI says above. This is exacerbated by the fact that I used "Years" as the base variable. Lots of things happen in a year that are not related to each other! Most studies would use something like "one person" in stead of "one year" to be the "thing" studied.
  3. Observations not independent: For many variables, sequential years are not independent of each other. If a population of people is continuously doing something every day, there is no reason to think they would suddenly change how they are doing that thing on January 1. A simple Personally I don't find any p-value calculation to be 'simple,' but you know what I mean.
    p-value calculation does not take this into account, so mathematically it appears less probable than it really is.
  4. Outlandish outliers: There are "outliers" in this data. In concept, "outlier" just means "way different than the rest of your dataset." When calculating a correlation like this, they are particularly impactful because a single outlier can substantially increase your correlation.

    For the purposes of this project, I counted a point as an outlier if it the residual was two standard deviations from the mean.

    (This bullet point only shows up in the details page on charts that do, in fact, have outliers.)
    They stand out on the scatterplot above: notice the dots that are far away from any other dots. I intentionally mishandeled outliers, which makes the correlation look extra strong.




Try it yourself

You can calculate the values on this page on your own! Try running the Python code to see the calculation results. Step 1: Download and install Python on your computer.

Step 2: Open a plaintext editor like Notepad and paste the code below into it.

Step 3: Save the file as "calculate_correlation.py" in a place you will remember, like your desktop. Copy the file location to your clipboard. On Windows, you can right-click the file and click "Properties," and then copy what comes after "Location:" As an example, on my computer the location is "C:\Users\tyler\Desktop"

Step 4: Open a command line window. For example, by pressing start and typing "cmd" and them pressing enter.

Step 5: Install the required modules by typing "pip install numpy", then pressing enter, then typing "pip install scipy", then pressing enter.

Step 6: Navigate to the location where you saved the Python file by using the "cd" command. For example, I would type "cd C:\Users\tyler\Desktop" and push enter.

Step 7: Run the Python script by typing "python calculate_correlation.py"

If you run into any issues, I suggest asking ChatGPT to walk you through installing Python and running the code below on your system. Try this question:

"Walk me through installing Python on my computer to run a script that uses scipy and numpy. Go step-by-step and ask me to confirm before moving on. Start by asking me questions about my operating system so that you know how to proceed. Assume I want the simplest installation with the latest version of Python and that I do not currently have any of the necessary elements installed. Remember to only give me one step per response and confirm I have done it before proceeding."


# These modules make it easier to perform the calculation
import numpy as np
from scipy import stats

# We'll define a function that we can call to return the correlation calculations
def calculate_correlation(array1, array2):

    # Calculate Pearson correlation coefficient and p-value
    correlation, p_value = stats.pearsonr(array1, array2)

    # Calculate R-squared as the square of the correlation coefficient
    r_squared = correlation**2

    return correlation, r_squared, p_value

# These are the arrays for the variables shown on this page, but you can modify them to be any two sets of numbers
array_1 = np.array([160,183,157,145,149,172,171,179,159,195,200,185,244,164,174,169,187,286,195,395,256,229,214,178,234,183,153,121,119,89,110,81,67,61,59,55,42,41,29,36,26,31,18,])
array_2 = np.array([6.22951,6.54206,7.51445,3.92157,5.39773,7.20222,3.62117,7.14286,9.0411,6.30137,5.47945,4.38356,5.75342,3.0137,4.38356,13.1507,2.18579,8.21918,6.84932,13.1507,9.56284,3.56164,4.38356,5.47945,3.55191,4.93151,9.86301,2.19178,3.82514,1.36986,2.73973,3.83562,2.18579,1.09589,0,2.73973,0.273224,1.09589,2.46575,0.547945,0.546448,0.273973,1.91781,])
array_1_name = "Popularity of the first name Lisette"
array_2_name = "Air pollution in Austin"

# Perform the calculation
print(f"Calculating the correlation between {array_1_name} and {array_2_name}...")
correlation, r_squared, p_value = calculate_correlation(array_1, array_2)

# Print the results
print("Correlation Coefficient:", correlation)
print("R-squared:", r_squared)
print("P-value:", p_value)



Reuseable content

You may re-use the images on this page for any purpose, even commercial purposes, without asking for permission. The only requirement is that you attribute Tyler Vigen. Attribution can take many different forms. If you leave the "tylervigen.com" link in the image, that satisfies it just fine. If you remove it and move it to a footnote, that's fine too. You can also just write "Charts courtesy of Tyler Vigen" at the bottom of an article.

You do not need to attribute "the spurious correlations website," and you don't even need to link here if you don't want to. I don't gain anything from pageviews. There are no ads on this site, there is nothing for sale, and I am not for hire.

For the record, I am just one person. Tyler Vigen, he/him/his. I do have degrees, but they should not go after my name unless you want to annoy my wife. If that is your goal, then go ahead and cite me as "Tyler Vigen, A.A. A.A.S. B.A. J.D." Otherwise it is just "Tyler Vigen."

When spoken, my last name is pronounced "vegan," like I don't eat meat.

Full license details.
For more on re-use permissions, or to get a signed release form, see tylervigen.com/permission.

Download images for these variables:


View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Your rating skills are top-notch!


Correlation ID: 3469 · Black Variable ID: 3735 · Red Variable ID: 20311
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0