about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #2,707 · 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 Berlin, New Hampshire and the second variable is Gasoline pumped in Denmark.  The chart goes from 1981 to 2022, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As the air in Berlin, New Hampshire cleared up, a team of industrious and environmentally conscious squirrels took it upon themselves to open a renewable energy company. They developed a revolutionary technology that turned air pollution into clean, green gasoline. This newfound supply of eco-friendly fuel quickly made its way to Denmark, leading to a significant decrease in the amount of regular gasoline being pumped. It's a story of how a breath of fresh air in one small town led to a global squirrel-powered energy revolution!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image of Berlin, New Hampshire, with towering high-tech buildings enveloped in smog and pollution, while individuals in futuristic masks navigate the city streets. Meanwhile, in Denmark, modern gasoline pumps line up neatly, dispensing fuel into sleek vehicles, illustrating the global demand for cleaner energy sources. 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 Berlin, New Hampshire and Gasoline pumped in Denmark. 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: Oragami Vaporwave High-tech Low poly A comic-book-style illustration with muted colors and a dotted halftone pattern from the 1960s
ChatGPT: High-tech

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 Berlin, New Hampshire and Gasoline pumped in Denmark, in the following situation: Because the increased air pollution in Berlin, New Hampshire led to a rise in demand for clean fuel alternatives, which prompted Denmark to increase its gasoline exports to meet the newfound need. As a result, more gasoline was pumped from Denmark to compensate for the environmental impact of the pollution, creating a correlation between the two seemingly unrelated events.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In Berlin, New Hampshire, smoggy air wraps around the buildings, and a haze of pollution hovers over the city. On the streets, people are seen wearing masks as they go about their day. Meanwhile, in Denmark, a line of gasoline pumps stand in a row, with fuel gushing into waiting vehicles, reflecting an increase in gasoline exports. The scene illustrates the connection between the rise in air pollution in Berlin, New Hampshire and the increased gasoline pumped in Denmark to address the demand for cleaner fuel alternatives.

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: [ High-tech ] and depicting this scene: In Berlin, New Hampshire, smoggy air wraps around the buildings, and a haze of pollution hovers over the city. On the streets, people are seen wearing masks as they go about their day. Meanwhile, in Denmark, a line of gasoline pumps stand in a row, with fuel gushing into waiting vehicles, reflecting an increase in gasoline exports. The scene illustrates the connection between the rise in air pollution in Berlin, New Hampshire and the increased gasoline pumped in Denmark to address the demand for cleaner fuel alternatives. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image of Berlin, New Hampshire, with towering high-tech buildings enveloped in smog and pollution, while individuals in futuristic masks navigate the city streets. Meanwhile, in Denmark, modern gasoline pumps line up neatly, dispensing fuel into sleek vehicles, illustrating the global demand for cleaner energy sources.

*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 Berlin, New Hampshire caused Gasoline pumped in Denmark to decrease. Make it feel plausible.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Fueling the Fire: A Gas-Spicious Connection Between Berlin Air Pollution and Danish Gasoline

The Journal of Environmental Quirks

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 researcher writing an academic paper.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 Berlin, New Hampshire and Gasoline pumped in Denmark. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Include a pun in the title.

Your research team used data from Environmental Protection Agency and Energy Information Administration to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.8355741 and p < 0.01 for 1981 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]]
"Fueling the Fire: A Gas-Spicious Connection Between Berlin Air Pollution and Danish Gasoline"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In the world of air quality research, our team was burning the midnight oil to uncover a gas-tounding connection between air pollution levels in Berlin, New Hampshire, and the gasoline pumped in Denmark. With data sourced from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Information Administration, our combustion of analysis from 1981 to 2022 revealed a blazing correlation coefficient of 0.8355741 and a scorching p-value of less than 0.01. Our findings ignite a lively discussion on the global impact of fuel consumption and its fiery influence on air pollution, sparking a flame of curiosity among researchers and policymakers alike. Join us as we throw some gas on the fire of knowledge, fueling the quest for a cleaner, greener world.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a researcher writing an academic paper.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 Berlin, New Hampshire and Gasoline pumped in Denmark. 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]]
"Fueling the Fire: A Gas-Spicious Connection Between Berlin Air Pollution and Danish Gasoline"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In the world of air quality research, our team was burning the midnight oil to uncover a gas-tounding connection between air pollution levels in Berlin, New Hampshire, and the gasoline pumped in Denmark. With data sourced from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Information Administration, our combustion of analysis from 1981 to 2022 revealed a blazing correlation coefficient of 0.8355741 and a scorching p-value of less than 0.01. Our findings ignite a lively discussion on the global impact of fuel consumption and its fiery influence on air pollution, sparking a flame of curiosity among researchers and policymakers alike. Join us as we throw some gas on the fire of knowledge, fueling the quest for a cleaner, greener world.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
Introduction

In the world of environmental research, uncovering unexpected connections can often feel like stumbling upon a hidden treasure – or in this case, a hidden gas-o-line. The correlation between air pollution levels in Berlin, New Hampshire, and the gasoline pumped in Denmark may seem like an unlikely duo, but our investigation has lit a fire under the stereotype that what happens in Berlin stays in Berlin.

As we delve into the complexities of this sizzling pairing, it becomes clear that the interplay between fuel consumption and air quality is anything but a gas-tly affair. With data as our trusty sidekick, we've been on a wild ride through decades of environmental data, from the era of neon windbreakers to the age of avocado toast. Our analysis has ignited a spark of curiosity that has left us gasping for breath – though hopefully not due to air pollution.

Much like navigating the treacherous waters of a statistical ocean, our quest to uncover the relationship between Berlin's air pollution and Danish gasoline has been an adventure of epic proportions. The journey has been fuelled by a potent mix of scientific inquiry, data analysis, and an unhealthy amount of caffeine – the triple-threat combo that keeps researchers from dozing off during late-night data crunching sessions.

With the flames of curiosity burning brightly, this research seeks to illuminate the far-reaching impact of fuel consumption on air quality, sparking a discussion that transcends borders and ignites a passion for a cleaner, greener world. So, strap in and buckle up – it's time to rev the engines of discovery and embark on an exhilarating journey through the curious connection between Berlin's air and Danish gasoline. Let's peel out onto the highway of knowledge, leaving tire marks of insight in our wake!


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a researcher writing an academic paper.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 Berlin, New Hampshire and Gasoline pumped in Denmark. 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]]
"Fueling the Fire: A Gas-Spicious Connection Between Berlin Air Pollution and Danish Gasoline"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In the world of air quality research, our team was burning the midnight oil to uncover a gas-tounding connection between air pollution levels in Berlin, New Hampshire, and the gasoline pumped in Denmark. With data sourced from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Information Administration, our combustion of analysis from 1981 to 2022 revealed a blazing correlation coefficient of 0.8355741 and a scorching p-value of less than 0.01. Our findings ignite a lively discussion on the global impact of fuel consumption and its fiery influence on air pollution, sparking a flame of curiosity among researchers and policymakers alike. Join us as we throw some gas on the fire of knowledge, fueling the quest for a cleaner, greener world.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
Introduction
In the world of environmental research, uncovering unexpected connections can often feel like stumbling upon a hidden treasure – or in this case, a hidden gas-o-line. The correlation between air pollution levels in Berlin, New Hampshire, and the gasoline pumped in Denmark may seem like an unlikely duo, but our investigation has lit a fire under the stereotype that what happens in Berlin stays in Berlin.
As we delve into the complexities of this sizzling pairing, it becomes clear that the interplay between fuel consumption and air quality is anything but a gas-tly affair. With data as our trusty sidekick, we've been on a wild ride through decades of environmental data, from the era of neon windbreakers to the age of avocado toast. Our analysis has ignited a spark of curiosity that has left us gasping for breath – though hopefully not due to air pollution.
Much like navigating the treacherous waters of a statistical ocean, our quest to uncover the relationship between Berlin's air pollution and Danish gasoline has been an adventure of epic proportions. The journey has been fuelled by a potent mix of scientific inquiry, data analysis, and an unhealthy amount of caffeine – the triple-threat combo that keeps researchers from dozing off during late-night data crunching sessions.
With the flames of curiosity burning brightly, this research seeks to illuminate the far-reaching impact of fuel consumption on air quality, sparking a discussion that transcends borders and ignites a passion for a cleaner, greener world. So, strap in and buckle up – it's time to rev the engines of discovery and embark on an exhilarating journey through the curious connection between Berlin's air and Danish gasoline. Let's peel out onto the highway of knowledge, leaving tire marks of insight in our wake!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

In the quest to understand the flammable connection between Berlin, New Hampshire's air pollution and the gasoline pumped in Denmark, researchers have scoured the depths of literature, diving headfirst into a firestorm of academic papers and studies. Smith et al. (2015) delve into the complexities of urban air pollution, shedding light on the intricacies of particulate matter and nitrogen dioxide emissions. However, as we wade deeper into the gasoline-soaked waters of this investigation, we stumble upon an unexpected gas-terpiece – "Gasoline: A History" by Doe (2018), which chronicles the evolution of the fuel that keeps the world's engines chugging along.

As our journey through the scientific landscape takes an unexpected turn, we stumble upon a treasure trove of fiction works that seem to echo the gas-tronomical theme of our investigation. Works such as "The Great Gasby" by F. Scott Fitzgerald and "Pump Fiction" by Quentin Tarantino offer tantalizing glimpses into the world of gasoline and its enigmatic allure. While these literary escapades may seem tangential to our scholarly pursuits, they serve as a whimsical reminder of the diverse influences that shape our understanding of fuel and its impact on air quality.

In the realm of social media musings, a post by @CleanAirActivist on Twitter catches our attention, as they fuel the flames of discussion with their poignant observation: "Is the air pollution in Berlin a fuel-moonating consequence of Danish gasoline? The plot thickens like crude oil!" This thought-provoking ponderance adds a touch of levity to our research, reminding us that the pursuit of knowledge can be as amusing as it is enlightening.

As we navigate the turbulent seas of academic inquiry, it becomes evident that the intersection of air pollution in Berlin and Danish gasoline is a topic that ignites curiosity and sparks a flair for the unexpected. With a trail of breadcrumbs and gasoline fumes leading us deeper into the rabbit hole of research, our pursuit of understanding is stoked by a sense of adventure and a hearty dose of whimsy. Join us as we rev our engines and zoom into the next chapter of this gas-powered odyssey, where the landscape is dotted with scholarly insights and the occasional splash of jest.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a researcher writing an academic paper.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 Berlin, New Hampshire and Gasoline pumped in Denmark. 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 Environmental Protection Agency and Energy Information Administration . You used data from 1981 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]]
"Fueling the Fire: A Gas-Spicious Connection Between Berlin Air Pollution and Danish Gasoline"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In the world of air quality research, our team was burning the midnight oil to uncover a gas-tounding connection between air pollution levels in Berlin, New Hampshire, and the gasoline pumped in Denmark. With data sourced from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Information Administration, our combustion of analysis from 1981 to 2022 revealed a blazing correlation coefficient of 0.8355741 and a scorching p-value of less than 0.01. Our findings ignite a lively discussion on the global impact of fuel consumption and its fiery influence on air pollution, sparking a flame of curiosity among researchers and policymakers alike. Join us as we throw some gas on the fire of knowledge, fueling the quest for a cleaner, greener world.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
Introduction
In the world of environmental research, uncovering unexpected connections can often feel like stumbling upon a hidden treasure – or in this case, a hidden gas-o-line. The correlation between air pollution levels in Berlin, New Hampshire, and the gasoline pumped in Denmark may seem like an unlikely duo, but our investigation has lit a fire under the stereotype that what happens in Berlin stays in Berlin.
As we delve into the complexities of this sizzling pairing, it becomes clear that the interplay between fuel consumption and air quality is anything but a gas-tly affair. With data as our trusty sidekick, we've been on a wild ride through decades of environmental data, from the era of neon windbreakers to the age of avocado toast. Our analysis has ignited a spark of curiosity that has left us gasping for breath – though hopefully not due to air pollution.
Much like navigating the treacherous waters of a statistical ocean, our quest to uncover the relationship between Berlin's air pollution and Danish gasoline has been an adventure of epic proportions. The journey has been fuelled by a potent mix of scientific inquiry, data analysis, and an unhealthy amount of caffeine – the triple-threat combo that keeps researchers from dozing off during late-night data crunching sessions.
With the flames of curiosity burning brightly, this research seeks to illuminate the far-reaching impact of fuel consumption on air quality, sparking a discussion that transcends borders and ignites a passion for a cleaner, greener world. So, strap in and buckle up – it's time to rev the engines of discovery and embark on an exhilarating journey through the curious connection between Berlin's air and Danish gasoline. Let's peel out onto the highway of knowledge, leaving tire marks of insight in our wake!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

Methodology

To unravel the mysterious connection between Berlin's air pollution and Danish gasoline, our research team embarked on a journey worthy of a classic detective novel. Picture trench coats, magnifying glasses, and the occasional dramatic "aha!" moment – though in reality, our tools were more likely to include computers, spreadsheets, and large quantities of coffee.

Data Collection:
Our first step was to cast a wide net across the vast ocean of internet data, seeking out pertinent information from reputable sources. We scoured the databases of the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Information Administration, sifting through decades of data from 1981 to 2022 like meticulous data archaeologists. The goal was to capture the essence of air pollution in Berlin and the gasoline consumption trends in Denmark, all while avoiding the pitfalls of data pollution and statistical misfires.

Data Cleaning and Preparation:
With our treasure trove of data in hand, we embarked on the perilous journey of data cleaning. Missing values, outliers, and suspicious data points were diligently scrutinized and either coaxed into submission or banished from our analysis. It was a battle of wits and perseverance, with the occasional victory dance when a particularly stubborn data point finally succumbed to our data-cleansing prowess.

Statistical Analysis:
Like master chefs crafting a culinary masterpiece, we artfully combined statistical methods such as correlation analysis and regression modeling to tease out the hidden flavors of our data. The process involved meticulous attention to detail, as we stirred in variables, seasoned with significance tests, and garnished with confidence intervals to create a delectable statistical feast. The end result? A tantalizing correlation coefficient that left our taste buds – er, statistical sensibilities – tingling with excitement.

Cross-Examination of Variables:
Just as a seasoned lawyer carefully interrogates witnesses to uncover the truth, we probed the relationship between Berlin's air pollution and Danish gasoline consumption from every imaginable angle. We examined variables such as vehicle emissions standards, industrial activity, and meteorological factors, determined to shed light on the enigmatic connection that seemed to elude conventional wisdom.

Ethical Considerations:
In the spirit of scientific integrity, our research team upheld the highest ethical standards in our data collection and analysis. We boldly resisted the temptation to cherry-pick data or manipulate statistical tests, choosing instead to embrace the noble path of transparency and intellectual honesty. Our commitment to ethical conduct ensured that our findings could withstand the scrutiny of peer review and scholarly discourse, standing as beacons of scientific trustworthiness in a sea of data-driven intrigue.

The culmination of these methodological endeavors paved the way for our scintillating findings, shedding light on the complex and surprisingly intertwined relationship between Berlin's air pollution and Danish gasoline consumption. Our methodology shines as a testament to the enduring spirit of scientific inquiry, fueled by equal parts dedication and a healthy dose of academic whimsy.

And here ends the insight into our meticulously crafted methodology – a journey through the scientific process that, much like a rare vintage automobile, has been polished to a glistening sheen of rigor and scholarly panache. Onward to the next chapter of discovery!


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a researcher writing an academic paper.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 Berlin, New Hampshire and Gasoline pumped in Denmark. 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 Environmental Protection Agency and Energy Information Administration .

For the time period 1981 to 2022, you found a correlation 0.8355741, r-squared of 0.6981841, 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]]
"Fueling the Fire: A Gas-Spicious Connection Between Berlin Air Pollution and Danish Gasoline"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In the world of air quality research, our team was burning the midnight oil to uncover a gas-tounding connection between air pollution levels in Berlin, New Hampshire, and the gasoline pumped in Denmark. With data sourced from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Information Administration, our combustion of analysis from 1981 to 2022 revealed a blazing correlation coefficient of 0.8355741 and a scorching p-value of less than 0.01. Our findings ignite a lively discussion on the global impact of fuel consumption and its fiery influence on air pollution, sparking a flame of curiosity among researchers and policymakers alike. Join us as we throw some gas on the fire of knowledge, fueling the quest for a cleaner, greener world.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
Introduction
In the world of environmental research, uncovering unexpected connections can often feel like stumbling upon a hidden treasure – or in this case, a hidden gas-o-line. The correlation between air pollution levels in Berlin, New Hampshire, and the gasoline pumped in Denmark may seem like an unlikely duo, but our investigation has lit a fire under the stereotype that what happens in Berlin stays in Berlin.
As we delve into the complexities of this sizzling pairing, it becomes clear that the interplay between fuel consumption and air quality is anything but a gas-tly affair. With data as our trusty sidekick, we've been on a wild ride through decades of environmental data, from the era of neon windbreakers to the age of avocado toast. Our analysis has ignited a spark of curiosity that has left us gasping for breath – though hopefully not due to air pollution.
Much like navigating the treacherous waters of a statistical ocean, our quest to uncover the relationship between Berlin's air pollution and Danish gasoline has been an adventure of epic proportions. The journey has been fuelled by a potent mix of scientific inquiry, data analysis, and an unhealthy amount of caffeine – the triple-threat combo that keeps researchers from dozing off during late-night data crunching sessions.
With the flames of curiosity burning brightly, this research seeks to illuminate the far-reaching impact of fuel consumption on air quality, sparking a discussion that transcends borders and ignites a passion for a cleaner, greener world. So, strap in and buckle up – it's time to rev the engines of discovery and embark on an exhilarating journey through the curious connection between Berlin's air and Danish gasoline. Let's peel out onto the highway of knowledge, leaving tire marks of insight in our wake!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

Our scorching pursuit of understanding the relationship between air pollution levels in Berlin, New Hampshire, and the gasoline pumped in Denmark has resulted in a gasp-inducing revelation. After analyzing the data from 1981 to 2022, we found a hair-raising correlation coefficient of 0.8355741 and an r-squared value that could set the scientific world ablaze at 0.6981841, with a p-value of less than 0.01.

Fig. 1 showcases the fiery connection between the two variables, the scatterplot illustrating a compelling pattern that would make any statistician whistle with admiration. This correlation is so hot, it's practically sizzling! It's like we've thrown a statistical match into a vat of gasoline and watched the results explode off the charts.

The strength of this correlation leaves us gasping for breath - though we hope it's not due to air pollution. The statistical significance of the findings leaves no room for doubt; the connection is as clear as day, or as murky as smog in a busy city – depending on which fuel source powers the analysis.

It's as if Berlin's air pollution and Danish gasoline are engaged in a high-stakes game of environmental chess, moving in tandem like well-oiled machines. It's a gas-tounding dance of cause and effect, where one player coughs up smoke, and the other fuels the fire. The implications of this dance reach far beyond these two locations, sparking a global conversation about the impact of fuel on air quality.

Our findings will surely light a fire under researchers and policymakers like a science-themed bonfire on a chilly night. The heat of this discovery blazes a trail for further investigation, igniting a passion for uncovering the complex dynamics at play in the world of environmental science. With this revelation, we've thrown some gas on the fire of knowledge, stoking the flames of curiosity and advancing the quest for a cleaner, greener world!


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a researcher writing an academic paper.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 Berlin, New Hampshire and Gasoline pumped in Denmark. 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]]
"Fueling the Fire: A Gas-Spicious Connection Between Berlin Air Pollution and Danish Gasoline"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In the world of air quality research, our team was burning the midnight oil to uncover a gas-tounding connection between air pollution levels in Berlin, New Hampshire, and the gasoline pumped in Denmark. With data sourced from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Information Administration, our combustion of analysis from 1981 to 2022 revealed a blazing correlation coefficient of 0.8355741 and a scorching p-value of less than 0.01. Our findings ignite a lively discussion on the global impact of fuel consumption and its fiery influence on air pollution, sparking a flame of curiosity among researchers and policymakers alike. Join us as we throw some gas on the fire of knowledge, fueling the quest for a cleaner, greener world.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
In the quest to understand the flammable connection between Berlin, New Hampshire's air pollution and the gasoline pumped in Denmark, researchers have scoured the depths of literature, diving headfirst into a firestorm of academic papers and studies. Smith et al. (2015) delve into the complexities of urban air pollution, shedding light on the intricacies of particulate matter and nitrogen dioxide emissions. However, as we wade deeper into the gasoline-soaked waters of this investigation, we stumble upon an unexpected gas-terpiece – "Gasoline: A History" by Doe (2018), which chronicles the evolution of the fuel that keeps the world's engines chugging along.
As our journey through the scientific landscape takes an unexpected turn, we stumble upon a treasure trove of fiction works that seem to echo the gas-tronomical theme of our investigation. Works such as "The Great Gasby" by F. Scott Fitzgerald and "Pump Fiction" by Quentin Tarantino offer tantalizing glimpses into the world of gasoline and its enigmatic allure. While these literary escapades may seem tangential to our scholarly pursuits, they serve as a whimsical reminder of the diverse influences that shape our understanding of fuel and its impact on air quality.
In the realm of social media musings, a post by @CleanAirActivist on Twitter catches our attention, as they fuel the flames of discussion with their poignant observation: "Is the air pollution in Berlin a fuel-moonating consequence of Danish gasoline? The plot thickens like crude oil!" This thought-provoking ponderance adds a touch of levity to our research, reminding us that the pursuit of knowledge can be as amusing as it is enlightening.
As we navigate the turbulent seas of academic inquiry, it becomes evident that the intersection of air pollution in Berlin and Danish gasoline is a topic that ignites curiosity and sparks a flair for the unexpected. With a trail of breadcrumbs and gasoline fumes leading us deeper into the rabbit hole of research, our pursuit of understanding is stoked by a sense of adventure and a hearty dose of whimsy. Join us as we rev our engines and zoom into the next chapter of this gas-powered odyssey, where the landscape is dotted with scholarly insights and the occasional splash of jest.

[[RESULTS]]
Our scorching pursuit of understanding the relationship between air pollution levels in Berlin, New Hampshire, and the gasoline pumped in Denmark has resulted in a gasp-inducing revelation. After analyzing the data from 1981 to 2022, we found a hair-raising correlation coefficient of 0.8355741 and an r-squared value that could set the scientific world ablaze at 0.6981841, with a p-value of less than 0.01.
Fig. 1 showcases the fiery connection between the two variables, the scatterplot illustrating a compelling pattern that would make any statistician whistle with admiration. This correlation is so hot, it's practically sizzling! It's like we've thrown a statistical match into a vat of gasoline and watched the results explode off the charts.
The strength of this correlation leaves us gasping for breath - though we hope it's not due to air pollution. The statistical significance of the findings leaves no room for doubt; the connection is as clear as day, or as murky as smog in a busy city – depending on which fuel source powers the analysis.
It's as if Berlin's air pollution and Danish gasoline are engaged in a high-stakes game of environmental chess, moving in tandem like well-oiled machines. It's a gas-tounding dance of cause and effect, where one player coughs up smoke, and the other fuels the fire. The implications of this dance reach far beyond these two locations, sparking a global conversation about the impact of fuel on air quality.
Our findings will surely light a fire under researchers and policymakers like a science-themed bonfire on a chilly night. The heat of this discovery blazes a trail for further investigation, igniting a passion for uncovering the complex dynamics at play in the world of environmental science. With this revelation, we've thrown some gas on the fire of knowledge, stoking the flames of curiosity and advancing the quest for a cleaner, greener world!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Our results have set the scientific world ablaze with excitement as we uncover the gas-spicious connection between air pollution in Berlin, New Hampshire, and the gasoline pumped in Denmark. It's as if our statistical analysis has lit a Bunsen burner under the conventional wisdom, transforming it into a conflagration of new insights and burning questions. Let’s rekindle some of the smoldering embers from our literature review and stoke the flames of our discussion with a gas-tacular dash of quirky observations and scholarly puns.

For starters, our correlation coefficient of 0.8355741 burns brighter than a magnesium flare, affirming the findings of Smith et al. (2015) regarding the complexities of urban air pollution and its link to fuel composition. While “The Great Gasby” by Fitzgerald may seem like a whimsical diversion, our results echo the themes of enigmatic allure and the pervasive influence of gasoline on air quality. Likewise, the Twitter ponderance by @CleanAirActivist takes on a gas-ly resonance as we uncover the fuel-moonating consequence of Danish gasoline. Indeed, the plot has thickened like crude oil, but our findings shed light on the combustible relationship between fuel and air pollution.

Our scatterplot, Fig. 1, blazes into view like a fireworks display on the Fourth of July, a visual testament to the heat between Berlin's air pollution and Danish gasoline. As we interpret this statistical tinderbox, it becomes evident that these variables are engaged in a gas-tounding tango of cause and effect. And much like the precise measurements in a chemistry lab, our findings leave little room for skepticism. We've struck scientific gold, igniting a firestorm of curiosity among researchers and policymakers worldwide.

This discovery fuels the quest for a cleaner, greener world, enkindling a passion for understanding the intricate dance between fuel consumption and environmental impact. It's as if we've thrown some gas on the fire of knowledge, sizzling into uncharted territories of environmental science. As we fan the flames of this discussion, it’s clear that our research has sparked an inferno of curiosity, burning through the barriers of conventional thinking and illuminating the path for future investigations.

In this conflagration of scientific inquiry, the burning question remains: what other unexpected connections lie waiting to be unearthed, ready to ignite a new understanding of the world around us? The fiery dance between Berlin's air pollution and Danish gasoline is just the beginning; the flame of discovery has been lit, and the excitement is gas-plosive. Let’s keep our scientific tinderbox stoked and continue to fuel the flames of knowledge.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a researcher writing an academic paper.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 Berlin, New Hampshire and Gasoline pumped in Denmark. 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]]
"Fueling the Fire: A Gas-Spicious Connection Between Berlin Air Pollution and Danish Gasoline"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In the world of air quality research, our team was burning the midnight oil to uncover a gas-tounding connection between air pollution levels in Berlin, New Hampshire, and the gasoline pumped in Denmark. With data sourced from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Information Administration, our combustion of analysis from 1981 to 2022 revealed a blazing correlation coefficient of 0.8355741 and a scorching p-value of less than 0.01. Our findings ignite a lively discussion on the global impact of fuel consumption and its fiery influence on air pollution, sparking a flame of curiosity among researchers and policymakers alike. Join us as we throw some gas on the fire of knowledge, fueling the quest for a cleaner, greener world.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
Introduction
In the world of environmental research, uncovering unexpected connections can often feel like stumbling upon a hidden treasure – or in this case, a hidden gas-o-line. The correlation between air pollution levels in Berlin, New Hampshire, and the gasoline pumped in Denmark may seem like an unlikely duo, but our investigation has lit a fire under the stereotype that what happens in Berlin stays in Berlin.
As we delve into the complexities of this sizzling pairing, it becomes clear that the interplay between fuel consumption and air quality is anything but a gas-tly affair. With data as our trusty sidekick, we've been on a wild ride through decades of environmental data, from the era of neon windbreakers to the age of avocado toast. Our analysis has ignited a spark of curiosity that has left us gasping for breath – though hopefully not due to air pollution.
Much like navigating the treacherous waters of a statistical ocean, our quest to uncover the relationship between Berlin's air pollution and Danish gasoline has been an adventure of epic proportions. The journey has been fuelled by a potent mix of scientific inquiry, data analysis, and an unhealthy amount of caffeine – the triple-threat combo that keeps researchers from dozing off during late-night data crunching sessions.
With the flames of curiosity burning brightly, this research seeks to illuminate the far-reaching impact of fuel consumption on air quality, sparking a discussion that transcends borders and ignites a passion for a cleaner, greener world. So, strap in and buckle up – it's time to rev the engines of discovery and embark on an exhilarating journey through the curious connection between Berlin's air and Danish gasoline. Let's peel out onto the highway of knowledge, leaving tire marks of insight in our wake!

[[RESULTS]]
Our scorching pursuit of understanding the relationship between air pollution levels in Berlin, New Hampshire, and the gasoline pumped in Denmark has resulted in a gasp-inducing revelation. After analyzing the data from 1981 to 2022, we found a hair-raising correlation coefficient of 0.8355741 and an r-squared value that could set the scientific world ablaze at 0.6981841, with a p-value of less than 0.01.
Fig. 1 showcases the fiery connection between the two variables, the scatterplot illustrating a compelling pattern that would make any statistician whistle with admiration. This correlation is so hot, it's practically sizzling! It's like we've thrown a statistical match into a vat of gasoline and watched the results explode off the charts.
The strength of this correlation leaves us gasping for breath - though we hope it's not due to air pollution. The statistical significance of the findings leaves no room for doubt; the connection is as clear as day, or as murky as smog in a busy city – depending on which fuel source powers the analysis.
It's as if Berlin's air pollution and Danish gasoline are engaged in a high-stakes game of environmental chess, moving in tandem like well-oiled machines. It's a gas-tounding dance of cause and effect, where one player coughs up smoke, and the other fuels the fire. The implications of this dance reach far beyond these two locations, sparking a global conversation about the impact of fuel on air quality.
Our findings will surely light a fire under researchers and policymakers like a science-themed bonfire on a chilly night. The heat of this discovery blazes a trail for further investigation, igniting a passion for uncovering the complex dynamics at play in the world of environmental science. With this revelation, we've thrown some gas on the fire of knowledge, stoking the flames of curiosity and advancing the quest for a cleaner, greener world!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

It's safe to say that our journey through the fiery connection between Berlin's air pollution and Danish gasoline has been nothing short of a blazing adventure. From uncovering a scorching correlation coefficient to witnessing statistical patterns hotter than a Bunsen burner on full blast, our findings have set the scientific world ablaze with curiosity.

As we extinguish the flames of this research, it's clear that the bond between air pollution and fuel consumption is no mere flash in the pan. The evidence speaks for itself, and it's as convincing as a well-delivered punchline at a comedy club – you simply can't ignore it.

While some may gasp at the unexpected link between Berlin and Denmark, our data leaves no room for doubt. This correlation is as strong as a cup of black coffee on a Monday morning – it'll jolt you wide awake. It's like uncovering a diamond in the rough, only this time, the gem is a sizzling insight into the global impact of fuel consumption on air quality.

As much as we love a good scientific mystery, it's time to douse the flames of speculation and assert that no more research is needed in this area. The connection between Berlin's air pollution and Danish gasoline is as clear as day, and it's burning brighter than a supernova – it's a scientific slam dunk.

So, let's bask in the glow of this revelation, celebrate the power of data-driven insights, and toast to a future that's cleaner, greener, and filled with a lot less smoke! With our findings as the guiding light, it's time to bid adieu to this research and set our sights on the next thrilling adventure in the vast expanse of scientific inquiry.


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 Fueling the Fire: A Gas-Spicious Connection Between Berlin Air Pollution and Danish Gasoline. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Environmental Quirks


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 Fueling the Fire: A Gas-Spicious Connection Between Berlin Air Pollution and Danish Gasoline. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The International Consortium for Environmental Pathways Research


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 Fueling the Fire: A Gas-Spicious Connection Between Berlin Air Pollution and Danish Gasoline with an abstract of In the world of air quality research, our team was burning the midnight oil to uncover a gas-tounding connection between air pollution levels in Berlin, New Hampshire, and the gasoline pumped in Denmark. With data sourced from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Information Administration, our combustion of analysis from 1981 to 2022 revealed a blazing correlation coefficient of 0.8355741 and a scorching p-value of less than 0.01. Our findings ignite a lively discussion on the global impact of fuel consumption and its fiery influence on air pollution, sparking a flame of curiosity among researchers and policymakers alike. Join us as we throw some gas on the fire of knowledge, fueling the quest for a cleaner, greener world.

ChatGPT:

Berlin air pollution, Danish gasoline, air quality research, correlation between air pollution and gasoline, environmental impact of fuel consumption, air pollution levels, fuel combustion analysis, global fuel consumption impact on air pollution

*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 Berlin, New Hampshire
Detailed data title: Percentage of days with moderate or worse air quality in Berlin, NH-VT
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
See what else correlates with Air pollution in Berlin, New Hampshire

Gasoline pumped in Denmark
Detailed data title: Volume of gasoline pumped consumed in Denmark in millions of barrels per day
Source: Energy Information Administration
See what else correlates with Gasoline pumped in Denmark

Correlation r = 0.8355741 (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 = 0.6981841 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 69.8% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Gasoline pumped in Denmark) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Air pollution in Berlin, New Hampshire) over the 42 years from 1981 through 2022.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 5.8E-12. 0.0000000000058436906371308804
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 5.8E-10% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 171,124,732,998 random variables You don't actually need 171 billion 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 41 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 41 because we have two variables measured over a period of 42 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.

[ 0.71, 0.91 ] 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.
198119821983198419851986198719881989199019911992199319941995199619971998199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022
Air pollution in Berlin, New Hampshire (Bad air quality days)0.1329480.08870970.1082470.1743120.1571910.2171430.1686390.1716870.2057970.1690540.220930.1601420.240.3033710.3684210.3602480.3028570.3668640.4685990.2673270.3932040.3454550.3142860.3739840.3770490.2653060.3347110.3076920.1513160.1878450.250.2684930.2356160.1369860.1892660.1698630.1769660.1771220.03086420.07377050.09722220.0250696
Gasoline pumped in Denmark (Million Barrels/Day)34333534.450835.421935.375335.419235.781435.304137.156239.380841.30642.342543.852144.290444.535545.723347.019246.668545.808744.871245.213745.21144.677643.430142.758942.619240.516438.172636.512334.915132.879831.443830.882230.769930.688530.630130.747930.723328.606629.635629.5425




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. 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([0.132948,0.0887097,0.108247,0.174312,0.157191,0.217143,0.168639,0.171687,0.205797,0.169054,0.22093,0.160142,0.24,0.303371,0.368421,0.360248,0.302857,0.366864,0.468599,0.267327,0.393204,0.345455,0.314286,0.373984,0.377049,0.265306,0.334711,0.307692,0.151316,0.187845,0.25,0.268493,0.235616,0.136986,0.189266,0.169863,0.176966,0.177122,0.0308642,0.0737705,0.0972222,0.0250696,])
array_2 = np.array([34,33,35,34.4508,35.4219,35.3753,35.4192,35.7814,35.3041,37.1562,39.3808,41.306,42.3425,43.8521,44.2904,44.5355,45.7233,47.0192,46.6685,45.8087,44.8712,45.2137,45.211,44.6776,43.4301,42.7589,42.6192,40.5164,38.1726,36.5123,34.9151,32.8798,31.4438,30.8822,30.7699,30.6885,30.6301,30.7479,30.7233,28.6066,29.6356,29.5425,])
array_1_name = "Air pollution in Berlin, New Hampshire"
array_2_name = "Gasoline pumped in Denmark"

# 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: 2707 · Black Variable ID: 21505 · Red Variable ID: 24349
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0