about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #5,570 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Air pollution in Kingston, New York and the second variable is NASA's budget as a percentage of the total US Federal Budget.  The chart goes from 1991 to 2012, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As air quality improved in Kingston, New York, residents found they could stargaze more easily. Their newfound interest in the cosmos led to a grassroots movement to reallocate government funds from space exploration to local community projects. They argued that it was time to "clear the air" about budget priorities and focus on issues closer to home. The campaign gained so much momentum that even NASA couldn't "air" out their grievances. In the end, the decision was made to "skyrocket" funding for earthly matters, leaving the space agency with a budget that was simply lost in space. The connection between cleaner air in a small town and the federal budget for space exploration was truly up in the air, but one thing was for sure: the people of Kingston had the "asthma" of power to effect change.

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: An image that looks like it is a scene from 'Star Wars', depicting this scene: In Kingston, New York, as the air quality improved, residents gathered under a starry night sky, clearly seeing the constellations. Meanwhile, in Washington, D.C., NASA's budget shrank to a tiny dot amidst federal spending, symbolizing the reallocated funds for local projects. The image should showcase a serene, starlit setting in Kingston, with residents gazing up at a magnificent sky dotted with recognizable constellations. In the distant background, the silhouette of Washington, D.C.'s skyline should be visible, with a diminished silhouette of NASA's budget allocation figuratively shrinking amidst federal spending. 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: Air pollution in Kingston, New York and NASA's budget as a percentage of the total US Federal Budget. 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: 3D Pixar Style Art nouveau An image that looks like it is a scene from 'Star Wars' Symbolism Oragami
ChatGPT: An image that looks like it is a scene from 'Star Wars'

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 Air pollution in Kingston, New York and NASA's budget as a percentage of the total US Federal Budget, in the following situation: As air quality improved in Kingston, New York, residents found they could stargaze more easily. Their newfound interest in the cosmos led to a grassroots movement to reallocate government funds from space exploration to local community projects. They argued that it was time to "clear the air" about budget priorities and focus on issues closer to home. The campaign gained so much momentum that even NASA couldn't "air" out their grievances. In the end, the decision was made to "skyrocket" funding for earthly matters, leaving the space agency with a budget that was simply lost in space. The connection between cleaner air in a small town and the federal budget for space exploration was truly up in the air, but one thing was for sure: the people of Kingston had the "asthma" of power to effect change.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In Kingston, New York, as the air quality improved, residents gathered under a starry night sky, clearly seeing the constellations. Meanwhile, in Washington, D.C., NASA's budget shrank to a tiny dot amidst federal spending, symbolizing the reallocated funds for local projects.

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: [ An image that looks like it is a scene from 'Star Wars' ] and depicting this scene: In Kingston, New York, as the air quality improved, residents gathered under a starry night sky, clearly seeing the constellations. Meanwhile, in Washington, D.C., NASA's budget shrank to a tiny dot amidst federal spending, symbolizing the reallocated funds for local projects. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: An image that looks like it is a scene from 'Star Wars', depicting this scene: In Kingston, New York, as the air quality improved, residents gathered under a starry night sky, clearly seeing the constellations. Meanwhile, in Washington, D.C., NASA's budget shrank to a tiny dot amidst federal spending, symbolizing the reallocated funds for local projects. The image should showcase a serene, starlit setting in Kingston, with residents gazing up at a magnificent sky dotted with recognizable constellations. In the distant background, the silhouette of Washington, D.C.'s skyline should be visible, with a diminished silhouette of NASA's budget allocation figuratively shrinking amidst federal spending.

*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 Air pollution in Kingston, New York caused NASA's budget as a percentage of the total US Federal Budget to decrease. Include one good pun.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Smog and Astronaut Swag: The Link Between Air Pollution in Kingston, New York and NASA's Budgetary High

The Journal of Ecological Economics and Space Exploration

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 Air pollution in Kingston, New York and NASA's budget as a percentage of the total US Federal Budget. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Rhyme words in the title.

Your research team used data from Environmental Protection Agency and Planetary.org to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.8363691 and p < 0.01 for 1991 to 2012.

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]]
"Smog and Astronaut Swag: The Link Between Air Pollution in Kingston, New York and NASA's Budgetary High"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the curious relationship between the air pollution levels in Kingston, New York, and the allocation of funds to NASA, commonly known as the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, as a fraction of the total US Federal Budget. Combining data from the Environmental Protection Agency's air quality monitoring in Kingston and Planetary.org's records for NASA's budget, our research team applied statistical methods to uncover a surprising bond. Our findings revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8363691, with a level of significance of p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 1991 to 2012. The results suggest a potential connection between the smog levels in Kingston and the countdowns to space launches. Our study not only sheds light on this peculiar association but also launches a discussion on the atmospheric impact of rocket science and the cosmic influence on local air quality. This paper aims to propel the scientific community's understanding of the interstellar influence on earthly realms and invites a comical yet thoughtful exploration of the curious correlation between Kingston’s smog and NASA's rocket-fueled swoosh.


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 Air pollution in Kingston, New York and NASA's budget as a percentage of the total US Federal Budget. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Smog and Astronaut Swag: The Link Between Air Pollution in Kingston, New York and NASA's Budgetary High"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the curious relationship between the air pollution levels in Kingston, New York, and the allocation of funds to NASA, commonly known as the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, as a fraction of the total US Federal Budget. Combining data from the Environmental Protection Agency's air quality monitoring in Kingston and Planetary.org's records for NASA's budget, our research team applied statistical methods to uncover a surprising bond. Our findings revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8363691, with a level of significance of p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 1991 to 2012. The results suggest a potential connection between the smog levels in Kingston and the countdowns to space launches. Our study not only sheds light on this peculiar association but also launches a discussion on the atmospheric impact of rocket science and the cosmic influence on local air quality. This paper aims to propel the scientific community's understanding of the interstellar influence on earthly realms and invites a comical yet thoughtful exploration of the curious correlation between Kingston’s smog and NASA's rocket-fueled swoosh.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

As we look up at the stars and ponder the mysteries of the universe, it's easy to forget that our earthly activities may be more intimately connected to the cosmos than we realize. In this paper, we explore the unexpected, and perhaps "out of this world," relationship between air pollution in Kingston, New York, and the budgetary trajectory of NASA. Who would have thought that the smog of a small town nestled in the picturesque Hudson Valley could have anything to do with the countdowns to space missions?

The idea for this research came about on a particularly hazy day in Kingston, where the air quality index seemed to mimic the complexity and confusion of the cosmic black hole. Could there be a link between the particulate matter floating around in Kingston and the stars twinkling above? Our curiosity was piqued, and thus began our intergalactic expedition into the realms of statistical analysis, budgetary reports, and the pursuit of a cosmic joke that may crack open the universe's sense of humor.

We invite the reader to buckle up and prepare for an astronomical journey through the relationship between air pollution and NASA's budget. Get ready to launch into a comical yet thought-provoking exploration of the unexpected bond between smoggy skies and interstellar quests. A breath of fresh air and a dash of stardust may just await us in the depths of this cosmic connection.


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 Air pollution in Kingston, New York and NASA's budget as a percentage of the total US Federal Budget. 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 you might move on to cartoons and children's shows that you watched for research.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Smog and Astronaut Swag: The Link Between Air Pollution in Kingston, New York and NASA's Budgetary High"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the curious relationship between the air pollution levels in Kingston, New York, and the allocation of funds to NASA, commonly known as the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, as a fraction of the total US Federal Budget. Combining data from the Environmental Protection Agency's air quality monitoring in Kingston and Planetary.org's records for NASA's budget, our research team applied statistical methods to uncover a surprising bond. Our findings revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8363691, with a level of significance of p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 1991 to 2012. The results suggest a potential connection between the smog levels in Kingston and the countdowns to space launches. Our study not only sheds light on this peculiar association but also launches a discussion on the atmospheric impact of rocket science and the cosmic influence on local air quality. This paper aims to propel the scientific community's understanding of the interstellar influence on earthly realms and invites a comical yet thoughtful exploration of the curious correlation between Kingston’s smog and NASA's rocket-fueled swoosh.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
As we look up at the stars and ponder the mysteries of the universe, it's easy to forget that our earthly activities may be more intimately connected to the cosmos than we realize. In this paper, we explore the unexpected, and perhaps "out of this world," relationship between air pollution in Kingston, New York, and the budgetary trajectory of NASA. Who would have thought that the smog of a small town nestled in the picturesque Hudson Valley could have anything to do with the countdowns to space missions?
The idea for this research came about on a particularly hazy day in Kingston, where the air quality index seemed to mimic the complexity and confusion of the cosmic black hole. Could there be a link between the particulate matter floating around in Kingston and the stars twinkling above? Our curiosity was piqued, and thus began our intergalactic expedition into the realms of statistical analysis, budgetary reports, and the pursuit of a cosmic joke that may crack open the universe's sense of humor.
We invite the reader to buckle up and prepare for an astronomical journey through the relationship between air pollution and NASA's budget. Get ready to launch into a comical yet thought-provoking exploration of the unexpected bond between smoggy skies and interstellar quests. A breath of fresh air and a dash of stardust may just await us in the depths of this cosmic connection.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

In their groundbreaking work, Smith et al. (2010) examined the air quality in Kingston, New York, and its potential impact on the allocation of federal funding to NASA. The authors find a statistically significant association between the two variables, pointing to a positive correlation between smog levels and incoming cosmic cash. This revelation sparks intrigue, prompting us to dive deeper into the uncharted celestial depths of budgetary allocations and pollution particulates. As we navigate through the cosmos of literature, we encounter the works of Doe and Jones (2015), who aptly compare the rise and fall of NASA's budget to the ebb and flow of pollutants in the Earth's atmosphere.

Now, prepare for the warp-speed transition from serious to silly. As we depart from the realm of academia, we take a detour into the quirky corridors of non-fiction literature. "Astro-Not," by Bill Nye and Neil deGrasse Tyson, humorously speculates on the cosmic consequences of air pollution on astronauts' nasal passages. Meanwhile, "The Smoggy Chronicles" by Dr. Seuss whimsically portrays a parallel universe where the Lorax speaks for the polluted skies, and the grumpy cat in the hat crafts rocket ships out of discarded pollution masks.

Our exploration doesn't stop there. We embark on a voyage through the vibrant landscapes of children's programming and cartoons, seeking inspiration from unexpected sources. SpongeBob SquarePants, with his underwater escapades, unknowingly shares valuable insights into the interplay between marine pollution and the cosmic balance of maritime resources. The denizens of Bikini Bottom, amidst their jellyfishing and Krabby Patty indulgences, inadvertently illuminate the interconnectedness of environmental disturbances and celestial phenomena.

As we emerge from this whimsical odyssey, we reinvigorate our pursuit of knowledge with an added dose of stellar wit and intergalactic charm. Our research endeavors to intertwine the esoteric mysteries of atmospheric pollutants with the overarching trajectory of spacecraft and cosmic adventure. The fusion of scientific inquiry with cosmic amusement propels us forward, inviting the reader to join us on this cosmic journey of discovery and delight.


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 Air pollution in Kingston, New York and NASA's budget as a percentage of the total US Federal Budget. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Environmental Protection Agency and Planetary.org . You used data from 1991 to 2012

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]]
"Smog and Astronaut Swag: The Link Between Air Pollution in Kingston, New York and NASA's Budgetary High"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the curious relationship between the air pollution levels in Kingston, New York, and the allocation of funds to NASA, commonly known as the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, as a fraction of the total US Federal Budget. Combining data from the Environmental Protection Agency's air quality monitoring in Kingston and Planetary.org's records for NASA's budget, our research team applied statistical methods to uncover a surprising bond. Our findings revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8363691, with a level of significance of p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 1991 to 2012. The results suggest a potential connection between the smog levels in Kingston and the countdowns to space launches. Our study not only sheds light on this peculiar association but also launches a discussion on the atmospheric impact of rocket science and the cosmic influence on local air quality. This paper aims to propel the scientific community's understanding of the interstellar influence on earthly realms and invites a comical yet thoughtful exploration of the curious correlation between Kingston’s smog and NASA's rocket-fueled swoosh.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
As we look up at the stars and ponder the mysteries of the universe, it's easy to forget that our earthly activities may be more intimately connected to the cosmos than we realize. In this paper, we explore the unexpected, and perhaps "out of this world," relationship between air pollution in Kingston, New York, and the budgetary trajectory of NASA. Who would have thought that the smog of a small town nestled in the picturesque Hudson Valley could have anything to do with the countdowns to space missions?
The idea for this research came about on a particularly hazy day in Kingston, where the air quality index seemed to mimic the complexity and confusion of the cosmic black hole. Could there be a link between the particulate matter floating around in Kingston and the stars twinkling above? Our curiosity was piqued, and thus began our intergalactic expedition into the realms of statistical analysis, budgetary reports, and the pursuit of a cosmic joke that may crack open the universe's sense of humor.
We invite the reader to buckle up and prepare for an astronomical journey through the relationship between air pollution and NASA's budget. Get ready to launch into a comical yet thought-provoking exploration of the unexpected bond between smoggy skies and interstellar quests. A breath of fresh air and a dash of stardust may just await us in the depths of this cosmic connection.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To uncover the cosmic dance between air pollution in Kingston, New York, and the allocation of funds to NASA, our research team embarked on an epic journey through the realms of data collection, statistical analysis, and interstellar speculation.

Data Collection:
Our team scoured the internet, venturing deep into the virtual cosmos of information, where the stars align, and the data points twinkle like distant galaxies. We harnessed the powers of the Environmental Protection Agency's air quality monitoring records for Kingston, extracting the atmospheric tales of smog and particulate matter that shroud this quaint town. The planetary orbits of NASA's budgetary figures were drawn from the constellation of records curated by Planetary.org, allowing us to glimpse into the financial universe of space exploration. We focused on a period spanning from 1991 to 2012, capturing the celestial dynamics of two seemingly disparate phenomena.

Statistical Analysis:
Armed with our cosmic compass, otherwise known as statistical software, we summoned the forces of correlation analysis to unveil the celestial bonds between air pollution and NASA's budget. We computed the correlation coefficient, that elusive quantifier of interstellar connection, and marveled at its magnitude—revealing a striking coefficient of 0.8363691. We tested the significance of this bond with a level of p < 0.01, affirming that this association is not merely a celestial coincidence but a statistically backed cosmic connection.

Interstellar Speculation:
Having charted the statistical orbits of our data points, we departed on a speculative quest into the cosmic implications of our findings. Could the smog of Kingston be entwined in the cosmic ballet of NASA's budgetary trajectory? What secrets lay hidden in the nebulous interplay between earthly air pollutants and the astronomical pursuits of space exploration? We invite the reader to join us on this intergalactic odyssey, where statistical analysis meets whimsical speculation, and the boundaries between earthly atmospheres and cosmic spheres blur into a celestial comedy of errors.


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 Air pollution in Kingston, New York and NASA's budget as a percentage of the total US Federal Budget. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Environmental Protection Agency and Planetary.org .

For the time period 1991 to 2012, you found a correlation 0.8363691, r-squared of 0.6995133, 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]]
"Smog and Astronaut Swag: The Link Between Air Pollution in Kingston, New York and NASA's Budgetary High"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the curious relationship between the air pollution levels in Kingston, New York, and the allocation of funds to NASA, commonly known as the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, as a fraction of the total US Federal Budget. Combining data from the Environmental Protection Agency's air quality monitoring in Kingston and Planetary.org's records for NASA's budget, our research team applied statistical methods to uncover a surprising bond. Our findings revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8363691, with a level of significance of p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 1991 to 2012. The results suggest a potential connection between the smog levels in Kingston and the countdowns to space launches. Our study not only sheds light on this peculiar association but also launches a discussion on the atmospheric impact of rocket science and the cosmic influence on local air quality. This paper aims to propel the scientific community's understanding of the interstellar influence on earthly realms and invites a comical yet thoughtful exploration of the curious correlation between Kingston’s smog and NASA's rocket-fueled swoosh.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
As we look up at the stars and ponder the mysteries of the universe, it's easy to forget that our earthly activities may be more intimately connected to the cosmos than we realize. In this paper, we explore the unexpected, and perhaps "out of this world," relationship between air pollution in Kingston, New York, and the budgetary trajectory of NASA. Who would have thought that the smog of a small town nestled in the picturesque Hudson Valley could have anything to do with the countdowns to space missions?
The idea for this research came about on a particularly hazy day in Kingston, where the air quality index seemed to mimic the complexity and confusion of the cosmic black hole. Could there be a link between the particulate matter floating around in Kingston and the stars twinkling above? Our curiosity was piqued, and thus began our intergalactic expedition into the realms of statistical analysis, budgetary reports, and the pursuit of a cosmic joke that may crack open the universe's sense of humor.
We invite the reader to buckle up and prepare for an astronomical journey through the relationship between air pollution and NASA's budget. Get ready to launch into a comical yet thought-provoking exploration of the unexpected bond between smoggy skies and interstellar quests. A breath of fresh air and a dash of stardust may just await us in the depths of this cosmic connection.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The analysis of the data collected on air pollution levels in Kingston, New York, and NASA's budget as a percentage of the total US Federal Budget revealed some intriguing findings. We found a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.8363691, indicating a strong positive relationship between the two variables. This coefficient suggests that as the air pollution levels in Kingston waxed and waned, so did the proportion of NASA's budget within the federal funding constellation.

Accompanying the high correlation coefficient, the r-squared value of 0.6995133 suggests that approximately 70% of the variance in NASA's budget as a proportion of the federal budget can be explained by the fluctuations in air pollution levels in Kingston. In simpler terms, it seems that the more polluted the air in Kingston, the greater the portion of the federal budget allocated to NASA. It’s as if the particles in the air were reaching for the stars, and NASA was there to catch them!

The level of significance, with a p-value of less than 0.01, further solidifies the strength of this relationship. This p-value indicates that the probability of observing such a strong association between air pollution in Kingston and NASA's budgetary allocation just by random chance is less than 1%. It’s almost as rare as finding a shooting star in the midst of a New York City night.

In Figure 1, our scatterplot provides a visual representation of this compelling correlation. The plot is a striking testament to the notable relationship between these seemingly unrelated factors. It appears that as the smog levels in Kingston fluctuated over the years, so did NASA's budgetary share, dancing along in a celestial waltz of allocation and airborne particles.

These findings not only defy conventional wisdom but also add a whimsical cosmic twist to our understanding of local pollution and national space endeavors. Who would have thought that a breath of fresh air in Kingston could launch another rocket into orbit or inflate NASA's budgetary aspirations? This unexpected discovery prompts a broader discussion surrounding the interplay of cosmic pursuits and earthly emissions, as well as the potential for a “stellar” impact on national funding decisions. Let’s not take our eyes off the skies or the local smog – there may be more cosmic connections waiting to be revealed!


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 Air pollution in Kingston, New York and NASA's budget as a percentage of the total US Federal Budget. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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]]
"Smog and Astronaut Swag: The Link Between Air Pollution in Kingston, New York and NASA's Budgetary High"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the curious relationship between the air pollution levels in Kingston, New York, and the allocation of funds to NASA, commonly known as the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, as a fraction of the total US Federal Budget. Combining data from the Environmental Protection Agency's air quality monitoring in Kingston and Planetary.org's records for NASA's budget, our research team applied statistical methods to uncover a surprising bond. Our findings revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8363691, with a level of significance of p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 1991 to 2012. The results suggest a potential connection between the smog levels in Kingston and the countdowns to space launches. Our study not only sheds light on this peculiar association but also launches a discussion on the atmospheric impact of rocket science and the cosmic influence on local air quality. This paper aims to propel the scientific community's understanding of the interstellar influence on earthly realms and invites a comical yet thoughtful exploration of the curious correlation between Kingston’s smog and NASA's rocket-fueled swoosh.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
In their groundbreaking work, Smith et al. (2010) examined the air quality in Kingston, New York, and its potential impact on the allocation of federal funding to NASA. The authors find a statistically significant association between the two variables, pointing to a positive correlation between smog levels and incoming cosmic cash. This revelation sparks intrigue, prompting us to dive deeper into the uncharted celestial depths of budgetary allocations and pollution particulates. As we navigate through the cosmos of literature, we encounter the works of Doe and Jones (2015), who aptly compare the rise and fall of NASA's budget to the ebb and flow of pollutants in the Earth's atmosphere.
Now, prepare for the warp-speed transition from serious to silly. As we depart from the realm of academia, we take a detour into the quirky corridors of non-fiction literature. "Astro-Not," by Bill Nye and Neil deGrasse Tyson, humorously speculates on the cosmic consequences of air pollution on astronauts' nasal passages. Meanwhile, "The Smoggy Chronicles" by Dr. Seuss whimsically portrays a parallel universe where the Lorax speaks for the polluted skies, and the grumpy cat in the hat crafts rocket ships out of discarded pollution masks.
Our exploration doesn't stop there. We embark on a voyage through the vibrant landscapes of children's programming and cartoons, seeking inspiration from unexpected sources. SpongeBob SquarePants, with his underwater escapades, unknowingly shares valuable insights into the interplay between marine pollution and the cosmic balance of maritime resources. The denizens of Bikini Bottom, amidst their jellyfishing and Krabby Patty indulgences, inadvertently illuminate the interconnectedness of environmental disturbances and celestial phenomena.
As we emerge from this whimsical odyssey, we reinvigorate our pursuit of knowledge with an added dose of stellar wit and intergalactic charm. Our research endeavors to intertwine the esoteric mysteries of atmospheric pollutants with the overarching trajectory of spacecraft and cosmic adventure. The fusion of scientific inquiry with cosmic amusement propels us forward, inviting the reader to join us on this cosmic journey of discovery and delight.

[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of the data collected on air pollution levels in Kingston, New York, and NASA's budget as a percentage of the total US Federal Budget revealed some intriguing findings. We found a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.8363691, indicating a strong positive relationship between the two variables. This coefficient suggests that as the air pollution levels in Kingston waxed and waned, so did the proportion of NASA's budget within the federal funding constellation.
Accompanying the high correlation coefficient, the r-squared value of 0.6995133 suggests that approximately 70% of the variance in NASA's budget as a proportion of the federal budget can be explained by the fluctuations in air pollution levels in Kingston. In simpler terms, it seems that the more polluted the air in Kingston, the greater the portion of the federal budget allocated to NASA. It’s as if the particles in the air were reaching for the stars, and NASA was there to catch them!
The level of significance, with a p-value of less than 0.01, further solidifies the strength of this relationship. This p-value indicates that the probability of observing such a strong association between air pollution in Kingston and NASA's budgetary allocation just by random chance is less than 1%. It’s almost as rare as finding a shooting star in the midst of a New York City night.
In Figure 1, our scatterplot provides a visual representation of this compelling correlation. The plot is a striking testament to the notable relationship between these seemingly unrelated factors. It appears that as the smog levels in Kingston fluctuated over the years, so did NASA's budgetary share, dancing along in a celestial waltz of allocation and airborne particles.
These findings not only defy conventional wisdom but also add a whimsical cosmic twist to our understanding of local pollution and national space endeavors. Who would have thought that a breath of fresh air in Kingston could launch another rocket into orbit or inflate NASA's budgetary aspirations? This unexpected discovery prompts a broader discussion surrounding the interplay of cosmic pursuits and earthly emissions, as well as the potential for a “stellar” impact on national funding decisions. Let’s not take our eyes off the skies or the local smog – there may be more cosmic connections waiting to be revealed!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Our results have provided empirical support to the prior research conducted by Smith et al. (2010) and Doe and Jones (2015), who initially hinted at the possible correlation between air pollution in Kingston, New York, and NASA's budgetary allocations. The remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.8363691 that we observed in our study corroborates the findings of these earlier works, affirming a strong positive relationship between smog levels and NASA's cosmic cash flow. It appears that the cosmic dance of federal funds and airborne particles is not just a flight of fancy but a quantifiable reality.

Our study has taken a lighthearted approach to the serious matter of air pollution and federal budget allocation, drawing inspiration from diverse sources such as children's literature and popular science figures. While delivering a dose of intergalactic humor, our research has underscored the unusual and unexpected connection between local smog and national space ambitions.

The r-squared value of 0.6995133 indicates that approximately 70% of the variability in NASA's budget as a percentage of the total US Federal Budget can be attributed to the fluctuations in air pollution levels in Kingston. This finding not only demonstrates the substantial impact of local environmental conditions on federal funding but also invites a whimsical reimagining of the cosmic interplay between earthly particles and celestial pursuers.

The level of significance, with a p-value of less than 0.01, lends robust support to the strength of the relationship we have uncovered. It is almost as if the stars have aligned to reveal this cosmic connection between earthly pollutants and extraterrestrial aspirations.

Our findings prompt a comical yet contemplative contemplation of the potential cosmic influence on national funding decisions. It seems that as the particles in the air reached for the stars, NASA was there to catch them, reflecting a celestial waltz of allocation and airborne particles. Perhaps, in the cosmic swirl of federal budgetary decisions, the twinkling allure of the stars exerts an unexpected pull on funding allocations, mirroring the ebb and flow of pollution particles through the local atmosphere.

While our study has lent support to the existence of a tangible link between air pollution in Kingston and NASA's budget as a percentage of the total US Federal Budget, the underlying mechanisms driving this relationship remain enshrouded in cosmic mystery. Our discovery invites further investigation into the interstellar forces at play in federal budgetary decisions and emphasizes the need for a cosmic perspective in earthly environmental policies.

As we look toward the future, our research calls for a broader exploration of the cosmic connections shaping earthly affairs and the potential influence of celestial phenomena on national resource allocations. Who knows what other celestial surprises await us as we continue our cosmic journey of discovery and delight?


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 Air pollution in Kingston, New York and NASA's budget as a percentage of the total US Federal Budget. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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]]
"Smog and Astronaut Swag: The Link Between Air Pollution in Kingston, New York and NASA's Budgetary High"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the curious relationship between the air pollution levels in Kingston, New York, and the allocation of funds to NASA, commonly known as the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, as a fraction of the total US Federal Budget. Combining data from the Environmental Protection Agency's air quality monitoring in Kingston and Planetary.org's records for NASA's budget, our research team applied statistical methods to uncover a surprising bond. Our findings revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8363691, with a level of significance of p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 1991 to 2012. The results suggest a potential connection between the smog levels in Kingston and the countdowns to space launches. Our study not only sheds light on this peculiar association but also launches a discussion on the atmospheric impact of rocket science and the cosmic influence on local air quality. This paper aims to propel the scientific community's understanding of the interstellar influence on earthly realms and invites a comical yet thoughtful exploration of the curious correlation between Kingston’s smog and NASA's rocket-fueled swoosh.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
As we look up at the stars and ponder the mysteries of the universe, it's easy to forget that our earthly activities may be more intimately connected to the cosmos than we realize. In this paper, we explore the unexpected, and perhaps "out of this world," relationship between air pollution in Kingston, New York, and the budgetary trajectory of NASA. Who would have thought that the smog of a small town nestled in the picturesque Hudson Valley could have anything to do with the countdowns to space missions?
The idea for this research came about on a particularly hazy day in Kingston, where the air quality index seemed to mimic the complexity and confusion of the cosmic black hole. Could there be a link between the particulate matter floating around in Kingston and the stars twinkling above? Our curiosity was piqued, and thus began our intergalactic expedition into the realms of statistical analysis, budgetary reports, and the pursuit of a cosmic joke that may crack open the universe's sense of humor.
We invite the reader to buckle up and prepare for an astronomical journey through the relationship between air pollution and NASA's budget. Get ready to launch into a comical yet thought-provoking exploration of the unexpected bond between smoggy skies and interstellar quests. A breath of fresh air and a dash of stardust may just await us in the depths of this cosmic connection.

[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of the data collected on air pollution levels in Kingston, New York, and NASA's budget as a percentage of the total US Federal Budget revealed some intriguing findings. We found a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.8363691, indicating a strong positive relationship between the two variables. This coefficient suggests that as the air pollution levels in Kingston waxed and waned, so did the proportion of NASA's budget within the federal funding constellation.
Accompanying the high correlation coefficient, the r-squared value of 0.6995133 suggests that approximately 70% of the variance in NASA's budget as a proportion of the federal budget can be explained by the fluctuations in air pollution levels in Kingston. In simpler terms, it seems that the more polluted the air in Kingston, the greater the portion of the federal budget allocated to NASA. It’s as if the particles in the air were reaching for the stars, and NASA was there to catch them!
The level of significance, with a p-value of less than 0.01, further solidifies the strength of this relationship. This p-value indicates that the probability of observing such a strong association between air pollution in Kingston and NASA's budgetary allocation just by random chance is less than 1%. It’s almost as rare as finding a shooting star in the midst of a New York City night.
In Figure 1, our scatterplot provides a visual representation of this compelling correlation. The plot is a striking testament to the notable relationship between these seemingly unrelated factors. It appears that as the smog levels in Kingston fluctuated over the years, so did NASA's budgetary share, dancing along in a celestial waltz of allocation and airborne particles.
These findings not only defy conventional wisdom but also add a whimsical cosmic twist to our understanding of local pollution and national space endeavors. Who would have thought that a breath of fresh air in Kingston could launch another rocket into orbit or inflate NASA's budgetary aspirations? This unexpected discovery prompts a broader discussion surrounding the interplay of cosmic pursuits and earthly emissions, as well as the potential for a “stellar” impact on national funding decisions. Let’s not take our eyes off the skies or the local smog – there may be more cosmic connections waiting to be revealed!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our investigation into the correlation between air pollution in Kingston, New York, and NASA's budget as a percentage of the total US Federal Budget has left us starry-eyed and breathless. The remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.8363691 has launched us into a new stratosphere of statistical astonishment, leaving us to marvel at the cosmic dance between earthly smog and interstellar budgetary allocations.

As our findings suggest, the air quality in Kingston appears to have a seemingly gravitational pull on the proportion of the federal budget earmarked for NASA. It's as if the particles in the air are not only affecting local atmospheric conditions but also reaching for the stars, prompting a celestial budgetary tango. Could it be that NASA's budgetary aspirations are fueled by the very particles that drift through the Hudson Valley skies?

The r-squared value of 0.6995133 further underscores the substantial impact of air pollution in Kingston on NASA's budget, illuminating nearly 70% of the variance in the allocation of cosmic resources. It's as if the town's smog is composing an ode to space exploration, and NASA is tuning its budgetary instruments to the symphony of earthly emissions.

The level of significance, with a p-value of less than 0.01, guides us to a rare celestial sight, akin to catching a glimpse of Halley's Comet. The probability of this striking association occurring by mere chance is less than 1%, akin to stumbling upon a shooting star in a bustling New York City evening.

Our scatterplot, a veritable celestial masterpiece, paints a vivid picture of the cosmic connection between Kingston's smog and NASA's budgetary trajectory. It appears that as the smog levels in Kingston oscillated, so did NASA's budgetary share, waltzing through the cosmic expanse of allocation and airborne particles.

This research not only shines a light on the unexpected interstellar influence on earthly realms but also launches a comical but thoughtful exploration of local smog's impact on national space missions. Our findings have left us star-struck and smog-smitten, and we encourage future research to boldly go where no statistical analysis has gone before – although, to be fair, we can confidently assert that no further research is needed in this cosmic pairing of terrestrial smog and NASA's budgetary endeavors.


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 Smog and Astronaut Swag: The Link Between Air Pollution in Kingston, New York and NASA's Budgetary High. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Ecological Economics and Space Exploration


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 Smog and Astronaut Swag: The Link Between Air Pollution in Kingston, New York and NASA's Budgetary High. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Institute for Atmospheric Anomalies and Cosmic Consequences


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 Smog and Astronaut Swag: The Link Between Air Pollution in Kingston, New York and NASA's Budgetary High with an abstract of This study delves into the curious relationship between the air pollution levels in Kingston, New York, and the allocation of funds to NASA, commonly known as the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, as a fraction of the total US Federal Budget. Combining data from the Environmental Protection Agency's air quality monitoring in Kingston and Planetary.org's records for NASA's budget, our research team applied statistical methods to uncover a surprising bond. Our findings revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8363691, with a level of significance of p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 1991 to 2012. The results suggest a potential connection between the smog levels in Kingston and the countdowns to space launches. Our study not only sheds light on this peculiar association but also launches a discussion on the atmospheric impact of rocket science and the cosmic influence on local air quality. This paper aims to propel the scientific community's understanding of the interstellar influence on earthly realms and invites a comical yet thoughtful exploration of the curious correlation between Kingston’s smog and NASA's rocket-fueled swoosh.

ChatGPT:

Smog, Air pollution, NASA budget, Kingston New York, Air quality monitoring, Federal Budget, Environmental Protection Agency, Planetary.org, Statistical methods, Correlation coefficient, Significance level, Space launches, Rocket science, Atmospheric impact, Interstellar influence, Local air quality

*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

Air pollution in Kingston, New York
Detailed data title: Percentage of days with air quality at 'unhealthy for sensitive groups' or worse in Kingston, NY
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
See what else correlates with Air pollution in Kingston, New York

NASA's budget as a percentage of the total US Federal Budget
Source: Planetary.org
See what else correlates with NASA's budget as a percentage of the total US Federal Budget

Correlation r = 0.8363691 (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 = 0.6995133 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 70% of the change in the one variable (i.e., NASA's budget as a percentage of the total US Federal Budget) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Air pollution in Kingston, New York) over the 22 years from 1991 through 2012.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 1.2E-6. 0.0000012408488496628670000000
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 0.84 in 0.00012% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 805,900 random variables You don't actually need 805 thousand 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 21 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 21 because we have two variables measured over a period of 22 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.

[ 0.64, 0.93 ] 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.
1991199219931994199519961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012
Air pollution in Kingston, New York (Bad air quality days)0.09090910.04069770.07438020.04407710.03899720.0301370.04109590.06285710.04838710.02777780.05219780.05263160.0386740.02209940.03098590.01388890.01666670.005617980.002762430.005509640.01111110.00282486
NASA's budget as a percentage of the total US Federal Budget (Percent of Federal Budget)1.051.011.010.940.880.890.90.860.80.750.760.720.680.660.630.570.580.60.540.550.490.49




Why this works

  1. Data dredging: I have 25,237 variables in my database. I compare all these variables against each other to find ones that randomly match up. That's 636,906,169 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. Y-axis doesn't start at zero: I truncated the Y-axes of the graph above. I also used a line graph, which makes the visual connection stand out more than it deserves. Nothing against line graphs. They are great at telling a story when you have linear data! But visually it is deceptive because the only data is at the points on the graph, not the lines on the graph. In between each point, the data could have been doing anything. Like going for a random walk by itself!
    Mathematically what I showed is true, but it is intentionally misleading. Below is the same chart but with both Y-axes starting at zero.




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([0.0909091,0.0406977,0.0743802,0.0440771,0.0389972,0.030137,0.0410959,0.0628571,0.0483871,0.0277778,0.0521978,0.0526316,0.038674,0.0220994,0.0309859,0.0138889,0.0166667,0.00561798,0.00276243,0.00550964,0.0111111,0.00282486,])
array_2 = np.array([1.05,1.01,1.01,0.94,0.88,0.89,0.9,0.86,0.8,0.75,0.76,0.72,0.68,0.66,0.63,0.57,0.58,0.6,0.54,0.55,0.49,0.49,])
array_1_name = "Air pollution in Kingston, New York"
array_2_name = "NASA's budget as a percentage of the total US Federal Budget"

# 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 correlation inspection deserves a standing ovation!


Correlation ID: 5570 · Black Variable ID: 22331 · Red Variable ID: 1084
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0