about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #2,982 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Popularity of the first name Thomas and the second variable is The number of statistical assistants in Florida.  The chart goes from 2003 to 2022, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

Fewer babies being named Thomas meant fewer potential statisticians wanting to move to Florida, causing a shortage of statistical assistants in the state. After all, everyone knows that Florida is the top destination for people with the name Thomas pursuing a career in statistics. It's just basic Thomas-istics!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image of a futuristic playground where children are gradually disappearing, leaving a group of high-tech statistical assistants to whittle stick figures. The setting should convey a sense of dwindling activity and ponderous technological presence. The background could feature sleek, modern playground equipment, while the foreground displays the statistical assistants engaged in their activity. The image should evoke a poignant contrast between the dwindling presence of the children and the persistent, almost solemn, work of the statistical assistants. The depiction should include only scenes, people, and objects, it should not include text or speech bubbles.
This image generation prompt was also generated by AI, using the following sequence:

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You select one of a few potential scene descriptors that seems to go along with the variables described. You respond only with the scene descriptions provided and say nothing else.
User prompt: Here are two variables: Popularity of the first name Thomas and The number of statistical assistants in Florida. 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: inspired by bauhaus Magic realism High-tech Steampunk Parallax art
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 Popularity of the first name Thomas and The number of statistical assistants in Florida, in the following situation: As the popularity of the name Thomas waned, so did the number of statistical assistants in Florida. It seems that without as many people named Thomas to admini-"strate" the workforce, there was a statistical drop in the number of statistical assistants. It's a real "name game" of numbers!. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: A playground with a decreasing number of children playing, and a group of statistical assistants standing nearby whittling stick figures. The children used to call out "Thomas" during games, and the statistical assistants would offer to help organize. But now, with fewer Thomases around, the statistical assistants seem to have fewer tasks.

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: A playground with a decreasing number of children playing, and a group of statistical assistants standing nearby whittling stick figures. The children used to call out "Thomas" during games, and the statistical assistants would offer to help organize. But now, with fewer Thomases around, the statistical assistants seem to have fewer tasks. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image of a futuristic playground where children are gradually disappearing, leaving a group of high-tech statistical assistants to whittle stick figures. The setting should convey a sense of dwindling activity and ponderous technological presence. The background could feature sleek, modern playground equipment, while the foreground displays the statistical assistants engaged in their activity. The image should evoke a poignant contrast between the dwindling presence of the children and the persistent, almost solemn, work of the statistical assistants.

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

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

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

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
The Thomas Theorem: An Analysis of the Correlation Between Thomas' Popularity and the Number of Statistical Assistants in Florida

The Journal of Irreverent Social Analysis

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 silly 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 Popularity of the first name Thomas and The number of statistical assistants in Florida. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Make the title punny if you can come up with clever pun. If not, just make it sound clever.

Your research team used data from US Social Security Administration and Bureau of Larbor Statistics to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9651984 and p < 0.01 for 2003 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]]
The Thomas Theorem: An Analysis of the Correlation Between Thomas' Popularity and the Number of Statistical Assistants in Florida

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study investigates the often overlooked connection between the popularity of the first name Thomas and the employment of statistical assistants in the state of Florida. Leveraging data from the US Social Security Administration and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, our research team meticulously analyzed the trends from 2003 to 2022. Surprisingly, we found a strikingly high correlation coefficient of 0.9651984 and a p-value less than 0.01, indicating a robust statistical relationship between the two variables. Our findings uncover a quirky yet intriguing association, shedding light on the idiosyncratic dynamics of nomenclature and labor force trends. Thus, our investigation prompts a tongue-in-cheek reconsideration of causality and challenges researchers to delve further into the whimsical realms of statistical modeling.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 Popularity of the first name Thomas and The number of statistical assistants in Florida. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
The Thomas Theorem: An Analysis of the Correlation Between Thomas' Popularity and the Number of Statistical Assistants in Florida

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study investigates the often overlooked connection between the popularity of the first name Thomas and the employment of statistical assistants in the state of Florida. Leveraging data from the US Social Security Administration and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, our research team meticulously analyzed the trends from 2003 to 2022. Surprisingly, we found a strikingly high correlation coefficient of 0.9651984 and a p-value less than 0.01, indicating a robust statistical relationship between the two variables. Our findings uncover a quirky yet intriguing association, shedding light on the idiosyncratic dynamics of nomenclature and labor force trends. Thus, our investigation prompts a tongue-in-cheek reconsideration of causality and challenges researchers to delve further into the whimsical realms of statistical modeling.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

In the realm of statistical analysis, researchers often seek out correlations between seemingly unrelated variables, like the number of statistical assistants and the popularity of certain first names. While many may consider this pursuit as fruitless as trying to find a four-leaf clover in a haystack, our study delves into the curious relationship between the prevalence of the first name Thomas and the employment of statistical assistants in the sunshine state of Florida.

The Thomas Theorem, as we have affectionately named it, stems from the notion that the popularity of the name Thomas may exhibit some unforeseen influence on the demand for statisticians. This seemingly whimsical inquiry led us to embark on a meticulous exploration, as we sought to identify any potential threads connecting a name predominantly associated with train conductors to the statistical workforce.

Leveraging data from the US Social Security Administration, we delved into the nitty-gritty of nomenclature trends, while simultaneously tapping into the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ treasure trove of employment data. Like Sherlock Holmes unravelling a confounding mystery, we meticulously sifted through the numbers from 2003 to 2022, slowly uncovering a surprising revelation that several members of our team initially deemed preposterous.

As we crunched the numbers, we were met with a revelation so unexpected, it left us questioning whether our Excel spreadsheets were playing an elaborate joke on us. To our astonishment, a correlation coefficient of 0.9651984 emerged from the data, accompanied by a p-value that was smaller than the amount of coffee consumed by researchers in a typical workday. This robust statistical relationship between the popularity of Thomas and the employment of statistical assistants prompts us to reconsider the causal pathways in a way that would make Alice in Wonderland pause and scratch her head.

While our findings may seem nonsensical at first glance, they serve as a delightful reminder that even the most peculiar connections may hold unexpected significance. This investigation not only highlights the quirky side of statistical modeling but also urges researchers to reexamine assumptions and embrace the enchanting allure of the unpredictable. So, let us journey forth and unravel the enchanting enigma of the Thomas Theorem, all while donning our academic attire and perhaps a detective's magnifying glass for good measure.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 Popularity of the first name Thomas and The number of statistical assistants in Florida. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, 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 name a few real TV shows that sound like they might be relevant to the topic that you watched as research.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
The Thomas Theorem: An Analysis of the Correlation Between Thomas' Popularity and the Number of Statistical Assistants in Florida

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study investigates the often overlooked connection between the popularity of the first name Thomas and the employment of statistical assistants in the state of Florida. Leveraging data from the US Social Security Administration and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, our research team meticulously analyzed the trends from 2003 to 2022. Surprisingly, we found a strikingly high correlation coefficient of 0.9651984 and a p-value less than 0.01, indicating a robust statistical relationship between the two variables. Our findings uncover a quirky yet intriguing association, shedding light on the idiosyncratic dynamics of nomenclature and labor force trends. Thus, our investigation prompts a tongue-in-cheek reconsideration of causality and challenges researchers to delve further into the whimsical realms of statistical modeling.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
In the realm of statistical analysis, researchers often seek out correlations between seemingly unrelated variables, like the number of statistical assistants and the popularity of certain first names. While many may consider this pursuit as fruitless as trying to find a four-leaf clover in a haystack, our study delves into the curious relationship between the prevalence of the first name Thomas and the employment of statistical assistants in the sunshine state of Florida.
The Thomas Theorem, as we have affectionately named it, stems from the notion that the popularity of the name Thomas may exhibit some unforeseen influence on the demand for statisticians. This seemingly whimsical inquiry led us to embark on a meticulous exploration, as we sought to identify any potential threads connecting a name predominantly associated with train conductors to the statistical workforce.
Leveraging data from the US Social Security Administration, we delved into the nitty-gritty of nomenclature trends, while simultaneously tapping into the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ treasure trove of employment data. Like Sherlock Holmes unravelling a confounding mystery, we meticulously sifted through the numbers from 2003 to 2022, slowly uncovering a surprising revelation that several members of our team initially deemed preposterous.
As we crunched the numbers, we were met with a revelation so unexpected, it left us questioning whether our Excel spreadsheets were playing an elaborate joke on us. To our astonishment, a correlation coefficient of 0.9651984 emerged from the data, accompanied by a p-value that was smaller than the amount of coffee consumed by researchers in a typical workday. This robust statistical relationship between the popularity of Thomas and the employment of statistical assistants prompts us to reconsider the causal pathways in a way that would make Alice in Wonderland pause and scratch her head.
While our findings may seem nonsensical at first glance, they serve as a delightful reminder that even the most peculiar connections may hold unexpected significance. This investigation not only highlights the quirky side of statistical modeling but also urges researchers to reexamine assumptions and embrace the enchanting allure of the unpredictable. So, let us journey forth and unravel the enchanting enigma of the Thomas Theorem, all while donning our academic attire and perhaps a detective's magnifying glass for good measure.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The relationship between the popularity of first names and labor market dynamics has long captivated the minds of researchers, as they endeavor to unravel the intricate web of societal influences on employment trends. Smith (2010) delved into this domain, exploring the potential impact of name popularity on occupational preferences. Meanwhile, Doe (2015) scrutinized trends in the statistical workforce, analyzing the factors that drive employment patterns in the realm of number-crunching professionals. Jones (2018) examined the cultural resonances of specific first names, shedding light on the subtle yet pervasive implications for career pathways.

Adding a twist to the exploration, "The Economics of Names" by Abrams and Agresti (2008) considers the societal and economic implications of name popularity, offering thought-provoking insights into the unforeseen influences that individuals' names may exert on their professional trajectories. In a similar vein, "Freakonomics" by Levitt and Dubner (2005) provocatively delves into the realms of behavioral economics, prompting readers to question conventional assumptions about cause and effect, an aspect that mirrors the spirit of our investigation.

Branching into the fictional realm, "The Name of the Wind" by Patrick Rothfuss and "Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell" by Susanna Clarke may seem unrelated at first glance, but their exploration of the mystical powers associated with names resonates with the whimsical nature of our study. In a more light-hearted dive into the literary world, "Anne of Green Gables" by L.M. Montgomery presents a fascinating narrative that examines the importance of names and the quirks that underlie nomenclature dynamics, adding a touch of levity to our scholarly pursuits.

Having mined the troves of pop culture for revelatory insight, our research team also ventured into the realms of television, closely observing shows such as "The Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt" and "Brooklyn Nine-Nine." While seemingly unrelated to statistical analysis and nomenclature, these series impart an understanding of the quirky, unexpected connections found within the intricate tapestry of human experiences, which emboldened our journey into the charmingly convoluted corridors of our study.

As we journey through the quirky landscape of name popularity and labor market trends, we tread the line between academic rigor and whimsical wonder, embracing the unexpected as we delve into the idiosyncrasies of statistical analysis.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 Popularity of the first name Thomas and The number of statistical assistants in Florida. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from US Social Security Administration and Bureau of Larbor Statistics . You used data from 2003 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]]
The Thomas Theorem: An Analysis of the Correlation Between Thomas' Popularity and the Number of Statistical Assistants in Florida

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study investigates the often overlooked connection between the popularity of the first name Thomas and the employment of statistical assistants in the state of Florida. Leveraging data from the US Social Security Administration and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, our research team meticulously analyzed the trends from 2003 to 2022. Surprisingly, we found a strikingly high correlation coefficient of 0.9651984 and a p-value less than 0.01, indicating a robust statistical relationship between the two variables. Our findings uncover a quirky yet intriguing association, shedding light on the idiosyncratic dynamics of nomenclature and labor force trends. Thus, our investigation prompts a tongue-in-cheek reconsideration of causality and challenges researchers to delve further into the whimsical realms of statistical modeling.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
In the realm of statistical analysis, researchers often seek out correlations between seemingly unrelated variables, like the number of statistical assistants and the popularity of certain first names. While many may consider this pursuit as fruitless as trying to find a four-leaf clover in a haystack, our study delves into the curious relationship between the prevalence of the first name Thomas and the employment of statistical assistants in the sunshine state of Florida.
The Thomas Theorem, as we have affectionately named it, stems from the notion that the popularity of the name Thomas may exhibit some unforeseen influence on the demand for statisticians. This seemingly whimsical inquiry led us to embark on a meticulous exploration, as we sought to identify any potential threads connecting a name predominantly associated with train conductors to the statistical workforce.
Leveraging data from the US Social Security Administration, we delved into the nitty-gritty of nomenclature trends, while simultaneously tapping into the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ treasure trove of employment data. Like Sherlock Holmes unravelling a confounding mystery, we meticulously sifted through the numbers from 2003 to 2022, slowly uncovering a surprising revelation that several members of our team initially deemed preposterous.
As we crunched the numbers, we were met with a revelation so unexpected, it left us questioning whether our Excel spreadsheets were playing an elaborate joke on us. To our astonishment, a correlation coefficient of 0.9651984 emerged from the data, accompanied by a p-value that was smaller than the amount of coffee consumed by researchers in a typical workday. This robust statistical relationship between the popularity of Thomas and the employment of statistical assistants prompts us to reconsider the causal pathways in a way that would make Alice in Wonderland pause and scratch her head.
While our findings may seem nonsensical at first glance, they serve as a delightful reminder that even the most peculiar connections may hold unexpected significance. This investigation not only highlights the quirky side of statistical modeling but also urges researchers to reexamine assumptions and embrace the enchanting allure of the unpredictable. So, let us journey forth and unravel the enchanting enigma of the Thomas Theorem, all while donning our academic attire and perhaps a detective's magnifying glass for good measure.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[METHODOLOGY]

To push the boundaries of traditional research methods and embrace the whimsical nature of our inquiry, our methodology involved a blend of structured statistical analyses, a dash of serendipitous explorations, and a sprinkle of unorthodox data mining techniques. Our approach may have appeared unconventional to some, akin to a fusion recipe concocted by an experimental chef, but rest assured, it was executed with the precision of a watchmaker crafting a delicate timepiece.

First, we embarked on a digital treasure hunt across the sprawling world wide web, scouring sources ranging from the hallowed repositories of the US Social Security Administration to the labyrinthine archives of the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The hedonistic delight of gleaning insights from these data troves was akin to embarking on a gastronomic safari, foraging for the most delectable morsels of information to satiate our voracious appetite for knowledge.

Our dedicated team meticulously harvested data spanning the years 2003 to 2022, sifting through the digital haystack for the elusive needle that would unravel the enigma of the Thomas Theorem. The fervor with which we combed through this virtual haystack could rival that of a dedicated bibliophile perusing ancient tomes in search of hidden gems of wisdom.

With the data firmly in our grasp, we wielded the awe-inspiring power of statistical software to perform a rigorous analysis, akin to a virtuoso conductor leading a symphony orchestra through a meticulously choreographed performance. Our statistical rigour surpassed even the most fastidious housekeeper's determination to maintain spotless domestic order.

Unearthing the correlation between the popularity of the name Thomas and the employment of statistical assistants in the state of Florida was not without its challenges. We employed regression analysis, time series modeling, and factor analysis techniques, akin to a seasoned alchemist concocting a potion to reveal hidden truths. The seemingly disparate elements of names and employment statistics harmonized under the scrutinizing gaze of our statistical methodologies, much like the unlikely pairing of peanut butter and jelly in a flawless culinary marriage.

Despite the unorthodox nature of our research journey, we approached our methodology with the gravity of a somber academic pursuit, all the while relishing the exhilarating thrill of uncovering the unexpected. Our approach encapsulated the essence of scholarly inquiry while embracing the playful spirit that permeates the whimsical world of statistical storytelling.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 Popularity of the first name Thomas and The number of statistical assistants in Florida. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from US Social Security Administration and Bureau of Larbor Statistics .

For the time period 2003 to 2022, you found a correlation 0.9651984, r-squared of 0.9316079, 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]]
The Thomas Theorem: An Analysis of the Correlation Between Thomas' Popularity and the Number of Statistical Assistants in Florida

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study investigates the often overlooked connection between the popularity of the first name Thomas and the employment of statistical assistants in the state of Florida. Leveraging data from the US Social Security Administration and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, our research team meticulously analyzed the trends from 2003 to 2022. Surprisingly, we found a strikingly high correlation coefficient of 0.9651984 and a p-value less than 0.01, indicating a robust statistical relationship between the two variables. Our findings uncover a quirky yet intriguing association, shedding light on the idiosyncratic dynamics of nomenclature and labor force trends. Thus, our investigation prompts a tongue-in-cheek reconsideration of causality and challenges researchers to delve further into the whimsical realms of statistical modeling.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
In the realm of statistical analysis, researchers often seek out correlations between seemingly unrelated variables, like the number of statistical assistants and the popularity of certain first names. While many may consider this pursuit as fruitless as trying to find a four-leaf clover in a haystack, our study delves into the curious relationship between the prevalence of the first name Thomas and the employment of statistical assistants in the sunshine state of Florida.
The Thomas Theorem, as we have affectionately named it, stems from the notion that the popularity of the name Thomas may exhibit some unforeseen influence on the demand for statisticians. This seemingly whimsical inquiry led us to embark on a meticulous exploration, as we sought to identify any potential threads connecting a name predominantly associated with train conductors to the statistical workforce.
Leveraging data from the US Social Security Administration, we delved into the nitty-gritty of nomenclature trends, while simultaneously tapping into the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ treasure trove of employment data. Like Sherlock Holmes unravelling a confounding mystery, we meticulously sifted through the numbers from 2003 to 2022, slowly uncovering a surprising revelation that several members of our team initially deemed preposterous.
As we crunched the numbers, we were met with a revelation so unexpected, it left us questioning whether our Excel spreadsheets were playing an elaborate joke on us. To our astonishment, a correlation coefficient of 0.9651984 emerged from the data, accompanied by a p-value that was smaller than the amount of coffee consumed by researchers in a typical workday. This robust statistical relationship between the popularity of Thomas and the employment of statistical assistants prompts us to reconsider the causal pathways in a way that would make Alice in Wonderland pause and scratch her head.
While our findings may seem nonsensical at first glance, they serve as a delightful reminder that even the most peculiar connections may hold unexpected significance. This investigation not only highlights the quirky side of statistical modeling but also urges researchers to reexamine assumptions and embrace the enchanting allure of the unpredictable. So, let us journey forth and unravel the enchanting enigma of the Thomas Theorem, all while donning our academic attire and perhaps a detective's magnifying glass for good measure.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The results of our investigation into the Thomas Theorem revealed a rather unexpected and, dare we say, delightful correlation between the popularity of the first name Thomas and the number of statistical assistants employed in the state of Florida. The statistical analysis yielded a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9651984, indicating a strong positive relationship between these seemingly disparate variables. This coefficient was accompanied by an r-squared value of 0.9316079, further emphasizing the robustness of the link. Additionally, the p-value of less than 0.01 underscored the statistical significance of this correlation, rendering it more captivating than a magician pulling a rabbit out of a hat.

Figure 1 presents a scatterplot illustrating the striking correlation between the prevalence of the name Thomas and the employment levels of statistical assistants in Florida. The plot depicts a clear upward trend, reminiscent of a synchronized dance between two seemingly incongruent partners. The visual representation of this relationship reinforces the statistical prowess of our findings, as it vividly captures the harmonious ebb and flow of the variables over the years.

These results, while initially met with disbelief and amusement by some members of our research team, compel us to reevaluate conventional assumptions and embrace the enchanting enigma embodied in the Thomas Theorem. This unexpected association serves as a charming reminder of the whimsical side of statistical analysis and prompts researchers to consider the unexplored terrain of nomenclature and its improbable connections to labor force dynamics.

In conclusion, the correlation between the popularity of the first name Thomas and the employment of statistical assistants in Florida stands as a testament to the captivating intricacies that lie beneath the surface of seemingly unrelated phenomena. This finding not only enriches our understanding of statistical relationships but also ignites a playful curiosity that beckons researchers to venture into the uncharted realms of peculiar correlations – all in pursuit of uncovering the delightful surprises that await beneath the veneer of statistical convention.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 Popularity of the first name Thomas and The number of statistical assistants in Florida. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, 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]]
The Thomas Theorem: An Analysis of the Correlation Between Thomas' Popularity and the Number of Statistical Assistants in Florida

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study investigates the often overlooked connection between the popularity of the first name Thomas and the employment of statistical assistants in the state of Florida. Leveraging data from the US Social Security Administration and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, our research team meticulously analyzed the trends from 2003 to 2022. Surprisingly, we found a strikingly high correlation coefficient of 0.9651984 and a p-value less than 0.01, indicating a robust statistical relationship between the two variables. Our findings uncover a quirky yet intriguing association, shedding light on the idiosyncratic dynamics of nomenclature and labor force trends. Thus, our investigation prompts a tongue-in-cheek reconsideration of causality and challenges researchers to delve further into the whimsical realms of statistical modeling.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The relationship between the popularity of first names and labor market dynamics has long captivated the minds of researchers, as they endeavor to unravel the intricate web of societal influences on employment trends. Smith (2010) delved into this domain, exploring the potential impact of name popularity on occupational preferences. Meanwhile, Doe (2015) scrutinized trends in the statistical workforce, analyzing the factors that drive employment patterns in the realm of number-crunching professionals. Jones (2018) examined the cultural resonances of specific first names, shedding light on the subtle yet pervasive implications for career pathways.
Adding a twist to the exploration, "The Economics of Names" by Abrams and Agresti (2008) considers the societal and economic implications of name popularity, offering thought-provoking insights into the unforeseen influences that individuals' names may exert on their professional trajectories. In a similar vein, "Freakonomics" by Levitt and Dubner (2005) provocatively delves into the realms of behavioral economics, prompting readers to question conventional assumptions about cause and effect, an aspect that mirrors the spirit of our investigation.
Branching into the fictional realm, "The Name of the Wind" by Patrick Rothfuss and "Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell" by Susanna Clarke may seem unrelated at first glance, but their exploration of the mystical powers associated with names resonates with the whimsical nature of our study. In a more light-hearted dive into the literary world, "Anne of Green Gables" by L.M. Montgomery presents a fascinating narrative that examines the importance of names and the quirks that underlie nomenclature dynamics, adding a touch of levity to our scholarly pursuits.
Having mined the troves of pop culture for revelatory insight, our research team also ventured into the realms of television, closely observing shows such as "The Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt" and "Brooklyn Nine-Nine." While seemingly unrelated to statistical analysis and nomenclature, these series impart an understanding of the quirky, unexpected connections found within the intricate tapestry of human experiences, which emboldened our journey into the charmingly convoluted corridors of our study.
As we journey through the quirky landscape of name popularity and labor market trends, we tread the line between academic rigor and whimsical wonder, embracing the unexpected as we delve into the idiosyncrasies of statistical analysis.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our investigation into the Thomas Theorem revealed a rather unexpected and, dare we say, delightful correlation between the popularity of the first name Thomas and the number of statistical assistants employed in the state of Florida. The statistical analysis yielded a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9651984, indicating a strong positive relationship between these seemingly disparate variables. This coefficient was accompanied by an r-squared value of 0.9316079, further emphasizing the robustness of the link. Additionally, the p-value of less than 0.01 underscored the statistical significance of this correlation, rendering it more captivating than a magician pulling a rabbit out of a hat.
Figure 1 presents a scatterplot illustrating the striking correlation between the prevalence of the name Thomas and the employment levels of statistical assistants in Florida. The plot depicts a clear upward trend, reminiscent of a synchronized dance between two seemingly incongruent partners. The visual representation of this relationship reinforces the statistical prowess of our findings, as it vividly captures the harmonious ebb and flow of the variables over the years.
These results, while initially met with disbelief and amusement by some members of our research team, compel us to reevaluate conventional assumptions and embrace the enchanting enigma embodied in the Thomas Theorem. This unexpected association serves as a charming reminder of the whimsical side of statistical analysis and prompts researchers to consider the unexplored terrain of nomenclature and its improbable connections to labor force dynamics.
In conclusion, the correlation between the popularity of the first name Thomas and the employment of statistical assistants in Florida stands as a testament to the captivating intricacies that lie beneath the surface of seemingly unrelated phenomena. This finding not only enriches our understanding of statistical relationships but also ignites a playful curiosity that beckons researchers to venture into the uncharted realms of peculiar correlations – all in pursuit of uncovering the delightful surprises that await beneath the veneer of statistical convention.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The correlation uncovered in our study between the popularity of the name Thomas and the employment of statistical assistants in Florida offers a fascinating insight into the interconnectedness of seemingly unrelated phenomena. While the association may seem as improbable as coming across a unicorn in a statistics textbook, our findings stand as a testament to the delightful surprises that statistical analysis can unearth.

Our results align with prior research that has delved into the curious intersection of nomenclature and labor market dynamics. Smith's (2010) exploration of the potential impact of name popularity on occupational preferences and Doe's (2015) scrutiny of statistical workforce trends both set the stage for our investigation. The undeniable positive correlation we uncovered echoes the whimsical undercurrent of the research by Jones (2018), as well as the thought-provoking insights proffered by Abrams and Agresti (2008) in "The Economics of Names." Furthermore, Levitt and Dubner's book "Freakonomics" inspires us to embrace the unexpected and question conventional assumptions, much akin to the spirit of our study.

Our findings not only support but also extend the existing body of literature by highlighting the idiosyncratic dynamics of nomenclature and labor force trends. The undeniable correlation coefficient and the striking scatterplot depicting the relationship between the prevalence of the name Thomas and the employment levels of statistical assistants in Florida crack open the door to a Pandora's box of peculiar correlations, urging researchers to embrace the enigmatic side of statistical analysis.

In light of our study, it becomes evident that the whimsical nature of our findings prompts a reconsideration of causality and challenges researchers to explore the uncharted territory of improbable connections. This unexpected association not only enriches our understanding of statistical relationships but also ignites a playful curiosity that beckons researchers to delve into the delightful surprises that await beneath the veneer of statistical convention.

The Thomas Theorem, as we fondly refer to it, divulges the enchanting enigma embodied in the peculiar relationship between a name and the labor force. This phenomenon serves as a compelling reminder of the allure of statistical analysis, compelling us to revisit conventional assumptions and celebrate the improbable connections that make the field as whimsically captivating as a mad tea party.

Further investigation into the interplay between nomenclature and labor market dynamics holds the promise of unraveling more delightful surprises, reminding us that beneath the surface of statistical convention lies a world of whimsy waiting to be explored.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 Popularity of the first name Thomas and The number of statistical assistants in Florida. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, 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]]
The Thomas Theorem: An Analysis of the Correlation Between Thomas' Popularity and the Number of Statistical Assistants in Florida

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study investigates the often overlooked connection between the popularity of the first name Thomas and the employment of statistical assistants in the state of Florida. Leveraging data from the US Social Security Administration and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, our research team meticulously analyzed the trends from 2003 to 2022. Surprisingly, we found a strikingly high correlation coefficient of 0.9651984 and a p-value less than 0.01, indicating a robust statistical relationship between the two variables. Our findings uncover a quirky yet intriguing association, shedding light on the idiosyncratic dynamics of nomenclature and labor force trends. Thus, our investigation prompts a tongue-in-cheek reconsideration of causality and challenges researchers to delve further into the whimsical realms of statistical modeling.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
In the realm of statistical analysis, researchers often seek out correlations between seemingly unrelated variables, like the number of statistical assistants and the popularity of certain first names. While many may consider this pursuit as fruitless as trying to find a four-leaf clover in a haystack, our study delves into the curious relationship between the prevalence of the first name Thomas and the employment of statistical assistants in the sunshine state of Florida.
The Thomas Theorem, as we have affectionately named it, stems from the notion that the popularity of the name Thomas may exhibit some unforeseen influence on the demand for statisticians. This seemingly whimsical inquiry led us to embark on a meticulous exploration, as we sought to identify any potential threads connecting a name predominantly associated with train conductors to the statistical workforce.
Leveraging data from the US Social Security Administration, we delved into the nitty-gritty of nomenclature trends, while simultaneously tapping into the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ treasure trove of employment data. Like Sherlock Holmes unravelling a confounding mystery, we meticulously sifted through the numbers from 2003 to 2022, slowly uncovering a surprising revelation that several members of our team initially deemed preposterous.
As we crunched the numbers, we were met with a revelation so unexpected, it left us questioning whether our Excel spreadsheets were playing an elaborate joke on us. To our astonishment, a correlation coefficient of 0.9651984 emerged from the data, accompanied by a p-value that was smaller than the amount of coffee consumed by researchers in a typical workday. This robust statistical relationship between the popularity of Thomas and the employment of statistical assistants prompts us to reconsider the causal pathways in a way that would make Alice in Wonderland pause and scratch her head.
While our findings may seem nonsensical at first glance, they serve as a delightful reminder that even the most peculiar connections may hold unexpected significance. This investigation not only highlights the quirky side of statistical modeling but also urges researchers to reexamine assumptions and embrace the enchanting allure of the unpredictable. So, let us journey forth and unravel the enchanting enigma of the Thomas Theorem, all while donning our academic attire and perhaps a detective's magnifying glass for good measure.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our investigation into the Thomas Theorem revealed a rather unexpected and, dare we say, delightful correlation between the popularity of the first name Thomas and the number of statistical assistants employed in the state of Florida. The statistical analysis yielded a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9651984, indicating a strong positive relationship between these seemingly disparate variables. This coefficient was accompanied by an r-squared value of 0.9316079, further emphasizing the robustness of the link. Additionally, the p-value of less than 0.01 underscored the statistical significance of this correlation, rendering it more captivating than a magician pulling a rabbit out of a hat.
Figure 1 presents a scatterplot illustrating the striking correlation between the prevalence of the name Thomas and the employment levels of statistical assistants in Florida. The plot depicts a clear upward trend, reminiscent of a synchronized dance between two seemingly incongruent partners. The visual representation of this relationship reinforces the statistical prowess of our findings, as it vividly captures the harmonious ebb and flow of the variables over the years.
These results, while initially met with disbelief and amusement by some members of our research team, compel us to reevaluate conventional assumptions and embrace the enchanting enigma embodied in the Thomas Theorem. This unexpected association serves as a charming reminder of the whimsical side of statistical analysis and prompts researchers to consider the unexplored terrain of nomenclature and its improbable connections to labor force dynamics.
In conclusion, the correlation between the popularity of the first name Thomas and the employment of statistical assistants in Florida stands as a testament to the captivating intricacies that lie beneath the surface of seemingly unrelated phenomena. This finding not only enriches our understanding of statistical relationships but also ignites a playful curiosity that beckons researchers to venture into the uncharted realms of peculiar correlations – all in pursuit of uncovering the delightful surprises that await beneath the veneer of statistical convention.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

The peculiar but undeniably robust correlation between the popularity of the first name Thomas and the employment of statistical assistants in Florida unveils a whimsical dance of statistical significance. This unexpected relationship, akin to a magician's surprising reveal, challenges conventional assumptions and tickles the fancy of researchers with its enchanting allure. While some may dismiss these findings as mere happenstance, our investigation urges the scientific community to embrace the delightful unpredictability that lies at the heart of statistical modeling. As we bid adieu to the Thomas Theorem, we do so with a twinkle in our eyes and a nod to the mysterious and marvelous web of connections that continue to underpin the world of empirical inquiry. With this in mind, we assert that no further research is needed in this area – unless, of course, one wishes to explore the enchanting conundrum of how names shape the world of labor statistics.


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 The Thomas Theorem: An Analysis of the Correlation Between Thomas' Popularity and the Number of Statistical Assistants in Florida. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Irreverent Social Analysis


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 The Thomas Theorem: An Analysis of the Correlation Between Thomas' Popularity and the Number of Statistical Assistants in Florida. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Institute for Social Dynamics and Thomasology


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 The Thomas Theorem: An Analysis of the Correlation Between Thomas' Popularity and the Number of Statistical Assistants in Florida with an abstract of This study investigates the often overlooked connection between the popularity of the first name Thomas and the employment of statistical assistants in the state of Florida. Leveraging data from the US Social Security Administration and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, our research team meticulously analyzed the trends from 2003 to 2022. Surprisingly, we found a strikingly high correlation coefficient of 0.9651984 and a p-value less than 0.01, indicating a robust statistical relationship between the two variables. Our findings uncover a quirky yet intriguing association, shedding light on the idiosyncratic dynamics of nomenclature and labor force trends. Thus, our investigation prompts a tongue-in-cheek reconsideration of causality and challenges researchers to delve further into the whimsical realms of statistical modeling.

ChatGPT:

Thomas popularity, statistical assistants, Florida employment, correlation, US Social Security Administration, Bureau of Labor Statistics, name trends, labor force dynamics, statistical relationship, nomenclature, causality, statistical modeling

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



Random correlation

Discover a new correlation

View all correlations

View all research papers

Report an error


Data details

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

The number of statistical assistants in Florida
Detailed data title: BLS estimate of statistical assistants in Florida
Source: Bureau of Larbor Statistics
See what else correlates with The number of statistical assistants in Florida

Correlation r = 0.9651984 (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 = 0.9316079 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 93.2% of the change in the one variable (i.e., The number of statistical assistants in Florida) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Popularity of the first name Thomas) over the 20 years from 2003 through 2022.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 6.3E-12. 0.0000000000062679960700684765
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 0.97 in 6.3E-10% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 159,540,623,322 random variables You don't actually need 159 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 19 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 19 because we have two variables measured over a period of 20 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.

[ 0.91, 0.99 ] 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.
20032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022
Popularity of the first name Thomas (Babies born)10949105421005095288938836377387143693468616804704472087373718868376651644366766475
The number of statistical assistants in Florida (Statistical Assistants)1140124012009908807204202002302302902404003302701307070420280




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([10949,10542,10050,9528,8938,8363,7738,7143,6934,6861,6804,7044,7208,7373,7188,6837,6651,6443,6676,6475,])
array_2 = np.array([1140,1240,1200,990,880,720,420,200,230,230,290,240,400,330,270,130,70,70,420,280,])
array_1_name = "Popularity of the first name Thomas"
array_2_name = "The number of statistical assistants in Florida"

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

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



Reuseable content

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

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

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

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

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

Download images for these variables:


View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Your rating is stellar!


Correlation ID: 2982 · Black Variable ID: 2013 · Red Variable ID: 6598
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0