Spurious correlation #4,421 · View random
A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Illinois and the second variable is Hotdogs consumed by Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion. The chart goes from 1979 to 2020, and the two variables track closely in value over that time.

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Illinois and the second variable is Hotdogs consumed by Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion. The chart goes from 1979 to 2020, and the two variables track closely in value over that time.

AI explanation

The democratic candidate's success led to a surge in political barbecue fundraisers. This created a high demand for hotdogs, inadvertently boosting the morale of the Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion. As the democratic votes rolled in, so did the extra buns for the hotdog champ, proving that in the world of competitive eating, it's all about relishing the opportunity.

^{Show image generation prompt} Model: dalle-3
Prompt: An image that looks like it is a scene from a Disney Movie: In a bustling Illinois town, a jubilant crowd gathers at a vibrant political barbecue fundraiser for the Democratic presidential candidate. The aroma of sizzling hotdogs fills the air as excited supporters cast their votes. Meanwhile, at a nearby hotdog stand, the reigning champion of Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition triumphantly devours an impressive number of hotdogs, boosted by the surplus of buns due to the surge in demand. The shared excitement and encouragement from the Democratic victory and the competitive hotdog eating champion create a festive, lively atmosphere in the town. 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: Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Illinois and Hotdogs consumed by Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion. 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: An image that looks like it is a scene from 'Star Wars' Low poly An image that looks like it is a scene from A Disney Movie Woodblock painting Vaporwave
ChatGPT: An image that looks like it is a scene from a Disney Movie

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 Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Illinois and Hotdogs consumed by Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion, in the following situation: The democratic candidate's success led to a surge in political barbecue fundraisers. This created a high demand for hotdogs, inadvertently boosting the morale of the Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion. As the democratic votes rolled in, so did the extra buns for the hotdog champ, proving that in the world of competitive eating, it's all about relishing the opportunity.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a bustling Illinois town, a jubilant crowd gathers at a vibrant political barbecue fundraiser. The aroma of sizzling hotdogs fills the air as excited supporters cast votes for the Democratic presidential candidate. Meanwhile, at a nearby hotdog stand, the reigning champion of Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition triumphantly devours an impressive number of hotdogs, boosted by the surplus of buns due to the surge in demand. The shared excitement and encouragement from the Democratic victory and the competitive hotdog eating champion create a festive, lively atmosphere in the town.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You write and improve image generation prompts for DALLE-3. You maintain the same subjects, but enhance the visuals.
User prompt: Please respond with an image generation prompt that would be likely to create an interesting visual using DALLE-3, using the following style: [ An image that looks like it is a scene from a Disney Movie ] and depicting this scene: In a bustling Illinois town, a jubilant crowd gathers at a vibrant political barbecue fundraiser. The aroma of sizzling hotdogs fills the air as excited supporters cast votes for the Democratic presidential candidate. Meanwhile, at a nearby hotdog stand, the reigning champion of Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition triumphantly devours an impressive number of hotdogs, boosted by the surplus of buns due to the surge in demand. The shared excitement and encouragement from the Democratic victory and the competitive hotdog eating champion create a festive, lively atmosphere in the town. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: An image that looks like it is a scene from a Disney Movie: In a bustling Illinois town, a jubilant crowd gathers at a vibrant political barbecue fundraiser for the Democratic presidential candidate. The aroma of sizzling hotdogs fills the air as excited supporters cast their votes. Meanwhile, at a nearby hotdog stand, the reigning champion of Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition triumphantly devours an impressive number of hotdogs, boosted by the surplus of buns due to the surge in demand. The shared excitement and encouragement from the Democratic victory and the competitive hotdog eating champion create a festive, lively atmosphere in the town.

*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.
^{Show prompt for explanation} 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 an increase in Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Illinois caused Hotdogs consumed by Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion to increase. Include one good pun.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)

The Democratic Delight: Mightier Match of Illinois Votes and Nathan's Hot Dog Devouring Doyens

The Journal of Gastronomic Governance and Electoral Edibles

Jan 2024

^{Show prompt used to generate this paper} 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 goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.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 Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Illinois and Hotdogs consumed by Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

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. Perhaps you also got inspiration from some board games that are vaugely related.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
The Democratic Delight: Mightier Match of Illinois Votes and Nathan's Hot Dog Devouring Doyens

[[ABSTRACT]]
As the saying goes, "Politics and hotdogs are both about the wurst!" In this study, we delve into the unconventional correlation between votes for the Democratic presidential candidate in the state of Illinois and the consumption of hotdogs by the champion of Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition. With a touch of humor and a dash of statistical analysis, we aim to uncover whether there is a meaty connection between these seemingly unrelated events.

Through the meticulous analysis of data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab and Harvard Dataverse, complemented by the self-proclaimed "reliable" information from Wikipedia, we discovered a surprising correlation coefficient of 0.9443038 and a p-value less than 0.01 for the years spanning 1979 to 2020. It seems that there might be more to this hotdog-democracy dynamic than mere coincidence – perhaps a case of "frankfurter fate," if you will!

Could it be that the voters' preference for the Democratic candidate in Illinois influences the reigning hotdog-eating champion's appetite for enjoying these succulent sausages? Or is it simply a statistical fluke that tickles our funny bone? Join us on this adventurous journey through democratic data and dining etiquette to unravel the mysteries of electoral fervor and gastronomic grandeur. In the world of academia, as in hotdog eating contests, sometimes you just have to relish the unexpected connections!

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
As researchers, we are no strangers to diving into the bizarre and the unexpected in pursuit of scientific inquiry. In the realm of statistical analysis, we often encounter relationships that leave us scratching our heads and muttering, "What in the name of Gaussian distribution is going on here?" Speaking of which, did you hear about the statistician who drowned in a river with an average depth of six inches? He was waist-deep in probability!
In this study, we set out to explore the burgeoning association between the votes cast for the Democratic presidential candidate in Illinois and the impressive feats of hotdog consumption by the illustrious champions of Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition. One might be inclined to inquire, "What does a political preference have to do with devouring hotdogs at a seemingly alarming rate?" Well, dear reader, we aim to unravel this delectable mystery. It seems that democracy and hotdogs have more in common than meets the mustard!
Before we delve into the meaty details of our analysis, it behooves us to consider the historical context of these two disparate phenomena coming together in an unlikely statistical embrace. After all, there's nothing like a good historical backdrop to set the stage for statistical shenanigans. Speaking of stages, did you hear about the probability theory play? It failed to deliver and the audience wasn't able to make heads or tails of it!
The state of Illinois has long been recognized as a political powerhouse, known for its passionate engagement in electoral affairs and equally fervent commitment to its culinary delights. Meanwhile, Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition has captured the hearts (and perhaps the arteries) of enthusiasts worldwide, setting the stage for awe-inspiring feats of gastronomic prowess. It's a collaboration worthy of a standing ovation – or maybe just a standing-room-only crowd at the research conference!
Now, let's talk numbers. Our analysis, conducted with the precision of a sommelier selecting the perfect wine, utilized data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab and Harvard Dataverse, with a sprinkle of information from the much-maligned yet inexplicably reliable Wikipedia. Through rigorous statistical methods, we uncovered a correlation coefficient that would make even the staunchest skeptics raise an eyebrow – a whopping 0.9443038, to be exact. It's like finding a statistical needle in a haystack – except the needle is a giant hotdog and the haystack is Illinois' political landscape!
But wait, there's more! Our p-value, that beloved arbiter of statistical significance, clocked in at less than 0.01. It seems that the connection between Democratic votes in Illinois and the hotdog prowess of Nathan's champions is not just a statistical mirage. It's a veritable statistical smorgasbord – with a side of sauerkraut, of course!
So, strap in and grab a napkin, dear reader. We're about to embark on a journey through the hallowed halls of democratic discourse and the exhilarating arena of competitive hotdog consumption. It's a symphony of democracy and deli fare, a potpourri of politics and polony. After all, in the world of statistical analysis, sometimes the most unexpected correlations turn out to be the wurst-kept secrets!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

In "The Political Palate: Exploring Culinary Connections to Electoral Behavior," Smith et al. delve into the intricate relationship between political preferences and culinary inclinations. Their study uncovers the surprising overlap between voting patterns and food consumption, challenging the conventional wisdom that politics and palates operate in separate realms. Could it be that political fervor and gustatory gusto go hand in hand? It's like they say, "You can't have a balanced diet without a bit of political seasoning!"

Moving from the culinary realm to the realm of competitive eating, Doe and Jones tackle the enigmatic link between athletic prowess and sausage ingestion in "Gobbling Glory: Unraveling the Mysteries of Competitive Eating." Through their exhaustive analysis of various competitive eating competitions, they reveal a trend that defies conventional wisdom. Could it be that the champion's voracious appetite extends beyond the dining table and influences their choices within the voting booth? It's a real "food for thought" situation!

Now, stepping away from the academic sphere and into the world of popular non-fiction, books such as "Fast Food Nation" by Eric Schlosser and "What Einstein Told His Cook: Kitchen Science Explained" by Robert L. Wolke provide intriguing insights into the relationship between food culture and broader societal trends. Additionally, the classic board game "Food Chain Magnate" offers a playful yet insightful exploration of the competitive dynamics within the culinary industry, inviting us to ponder the interplay between gastronomic indulgence and strategic decision-making.

On the fiction side, works such as "A Confederacy of Dunces" by John Kennedy Toole and "The Particular Sadness of Lemon Cake" by Aimee Bender offer whimsical narratives that intertwine human quirks with culinary curiosities, hinting at the complex and often unpredictable connections between human behavior and the consumption of delectable delights.

As we traverse the literary landscape, it becomes increasingly apparent that the intersection of political participation and hotdog consumption is not only a statistical anomaly but also a rich tapestry of human idiosyncrasies and unexpected correlations. It's a veritable fusion of sausage sustenance and democratic discourse, akin to a potluck where each voter brings their own flavor to the political picnic. After all, who knew that hotdogs and democratic decisions could be linked by more than just the occasional mustard stain? It's a revelation that might just ketchup with you.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.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 Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Illinois and Hotdogs consumed by Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. 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 MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and Wikipedia . You used data from 1979 to 2020

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 Democratic Delight: Mightier Match of Illinois Votes and Nathan's Hot Dog Devouring Doyens

[[ABSTRACT]]
As the saying goes, "Politics and hotdogs are both about the wurst!" In this study, we delve into the unconventional correlation between votes for the Democratic presidential candidate in the state of Illinois and the consumption of hotdogs by the champion of Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition. With a touch of humor and a dash of statistical analysis, we aim to uncover whether there is a meaty connection between these seemingly unrelated events.

Through the meticulous analysis of data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab and Harvard Dataverse, complemented by the self-proclaimed "reliable" information from Wikipedia, we discovered a surprising correlation coefficient of 0.9443038 and a p-value less than 0.01 for the years spanning 1979 to 2020. It seems that there might be more to this hotdog-democracy dynamic than mere coincidence – perhaps a case of "frankfurter fate," if you will!

Could it be that the voters' preference for the Democratic candidate in Illinois influences the reigning hotdog-eating champion's appetite for enjoying these succulent sausages? Or is it simply a statistical fluke that tickles our funny bone? Join us on this adventurous journey through democratic data and dining etiquette to unravel the mysteries of electoral fervor and gastronomic grandeur. In the world of academia, as in hotdog eating contests, sometimes you just have to relish the unexpected connections!

[[INTRODUCTION]]
As researchers, we are no strangers to diving into the bizarre and the unexpected in pursuit of scientific inquiry. In the realm of statistical analysis, we often encounter relationships that leave us scratching our heads and muttering, "What in the name of Gaussian distribution is going on here?" Speaking of which, did you hear about the statistician who drowned in a river with an average depth of six inches? He was waist-deep in probability!
In this study, we set out to explore the burgeoning association between the votes cast for the Democratic presidential candidate in Illinois and the impressive feats of hotdog consumption by the illustrious champions of Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition. One might be inclined to inquire, "What does a political preference have to do with devouring hotdogs at a seemingly alarming rate?" Well, dear reader, we aim to unravel this delectable mystery. It seems that democracy and hotdogs have more in common than meets the mustard!
Before we delve into the meaty details of our analysis, it behooves us to consider the historical context of these two disparate phenomena coming together in an unlikely statistical embrace. After all, there's nothing like a good historical backdrop to set the stage for statistical shenanigans. Speaking of stages, did you hear about the probability theory play? It failed to deliver and the audience wasn't able to make heads or tails of it!
The state of Illinois has long been recognized as a political powerhouse, known for its passionate engagement in electoral affairs and equally fervent commitment to its culinary delights. Meanwhile, Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition has captured the hearts (and perhaps the arteries) of enthusiasts worldwide, setting the stage for awe-inspiring feats of gastronomic prowess. It's a collaboration worthy of a standing ovation – or maybe just a standing-room-only crowd at the research conference!
Now, let's talk numbers. Our analysis, conducted with the precision of a sommelier selecting the perfect wine, utilized data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab and Harvard Dataverse, with a sprinkle of information from the much-maligned yet inexplicably reliable Wikipedia. Through rigorous statistical methods, we uncovered a correlation coefficient that would make even the staunchest skeptics raise an eyebrow – a whopping 0.9443038, to be exact. It's like finding a statistical needle in a haystack – except the needle is a giant hotdog and the haystack is Illinois' political landscape!
But wait, there's more! Our p-value, that beloved arbiter of statistical significance, clocked in at less than 0.01. It seems that the connection between Democratic votes in Illinois and the hotdog prowess of Nathan's champions is not just a statistical mirage. It's a veritable statistical smorgasbord – with a side of sauerkraut, of course!
So, strap in and grab a napkin, dear reader. We're about to embark on a journey through the hallowed halls of democratic discourse and the exhilarating arena of competitive hotdog consumption. It's a symphony of democracy and deli fare, a potpourri of politics and polony. After all, in the world of statistical analysis, sometimes the most unexpected correlations turn out to be the wurst-kept secrets!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To dissect the enigmatic intertwining of political preferences and prodigious hotdog consumption, we set forth on a grand endeavor, employing an eclectic mix of research methods reminiscent of a mad scientist's recipe book. Our methodology embraced the fervor of a political rally and the precision of a competitive eating contest, ensuring that our investigation left no bun unturned in pursuit of truth, or at least a good laugh.

First, to garner insights into the votes for the Democratic presidential candidate in Illinois, we gallivanted through the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, where we gleaned electoral data with the determination of a hotdog lover standing in line at a food truck. We meticulously examined the voting patterns from 1979 to 2020, ensuring that no election cycle was left unexamined. It was like a treasure hunt, only instead of gold doubloons, we were hunting for electoral data nuggets.

Simultaneously, our team delved into the world of competitive hotdog consumption, mining information on Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition champions from the depths of Wikipedia, employing a healthy dose of skepticism and a side of amusement. We approached this quest for hotdog-eating champions with the same fervor as a detective on a case, determined to unearth the heroes of the hotdog world. It was like Sherlock Holmes meets a chili dog-eating contest – an unexpected, but undeniably delightful, juxtaposition.

In order to establish the correlation between these two seemingly incongruous entities, we employed the venerable statistical tool of correlation analysis. With the ferocity of a hot dog devourer tackling a platter of the finest franks, we calculated the correlation coefficient, aiming to unveil the extent of the relationship between Democratic votes in Illinois and the hotdog-eating prowess of Nathan's champions. It was a statistical tango – a dance between electoral data and encased meats – and as researchers, we were determined to lead the way.

Furthermore, we subjected our findings to the crucible of statistical significance testing, utilizing the beloved p-value to ascertain the certainty of our detected correlation. Like a culinary connoisseur discerning the nuances of a hotdog's flavor profile, we meticulously scrutinized the p-value, seeking validation for our tantalizing discovery. Our statistical journey was akin to a rollercoaster ride, filled with thrilling highs and nail-biting (or nail-biting-free due to the consumption of hotdogs?) lows.

Finally, with a stroke of academic audacity, we contextualized our findings within the annals of democratic history and competitive eating lore, painting a vivid portrait of the extraordinary correlation uncovered. Our methodology, like a master chef concocting a novel hotdog recipe, combined precision, creativity, and a pinch of whimsy to unravel the delectable mystery of electoral fervor and gastronomic grandeur.

In the world of scientific inquiry, as in the realm of hotdog consumption, the journey to meaningful discoveries is littered with unexpected twists and turns, much like an unbun-eaten hotdog. And so, armed with statistical tools and a healthy dose of humor, we ventured forth into the glorious mayhem of analyzing the Democratic delight and the meaty match of Illinois votes and Nathan's hot dog-devouring doyens.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.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 Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Illinois and Hotdogs consumed by Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. 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 MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and Wikipedia .

For the time period 1979 to 2020, you found a correlation 0.9443038, r-squared of 0.8917097, 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 Democratic Delight: Mightier Match of Illinois Votes and Nathan's Hot Dog Devouring Doyens

[[ABSTRACT]]
As the saying goes, "Politics and hotdogs are both about the wurst!" In this study, we delve into the unconventional correlation between votes for the Democratic presidential candidate in the state of Illinois and the consumption of hotdogs by the champion of Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition. With a touch of humor and a dash of statistical analysis, we aim to uncover whether there is a meaty connection between these seemingly unrelated events.

Through the meticulous analysis of data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab and Harvard Dataverse, complemented by the self-proclaimed "reliable" information from Wikipedia, we discovered a surprising correlation coefficient of 0.9443038 and a p-value less than 0.01 for the years spanning 1979 to 2020. It seems that there might be more to this hotdog-democracy dynamic than mere coincidence – perhaps a case of "frankfurter fate," if you will!

Could it be that the voters' preference for the Democratic candidate in Illinois influences the reigning hotdog-eating champion's appetite for enjoying these succulent sausages? Or is it simply a statistical fluke that tickles our funny bone? Join us on this adventurous journey through democratic data and dining etiquette to unravel the mysteries of electoral fervor and gastronomic grandeur. In the world of academia, as in hotdog eating contests, sometimes you just have to relish the unexpected connections!

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
As researchers, we are no strangers to diving into the bizarre and the unexpected in pursuit of scientific inquiry. In the realm of statistical analysis, we often encounter relationships that leave us scratching our heads and muttering, "What in the name of Gaussian distribution is going on here?" Speaking of which, did you hear about the statistician who drowned in a river with an average depth of six inches? He was waist-deep in probability!
In this study, we set out to explore the burgeoning association between the votes cast for the Democratic presidential candidate in Illinois and the impressive feats of hotdog consumption by the illustrious champions of Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition. One might be inclined to inquire, "What does a political preference have to do with devouring hotdogs at a seemingly alarming rate?" Well, dear reader, we aim to unravel this delectable mystery. It seems that democracy and hotdogs have more in common than meets the mustard!
Before we delve into the meaty details of our analysis, it behooves us to consider the historical context of these two disparate phenomena coming together in an unlikely statistical embrace. After all, there's nothing like a good historical backdrop to set the stage for statistical shenanigans. Speaking of stages, did you hear about the probability theory play? It failed to deliver and the audience wasn't able to make heads or tails of it!
The state of Illinois has long been recognized as a political powerhouse, known for its passionate engagement in electoral affairs and equally fervent commitment to its culinary delights. Meanwhile, Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition has captured the hearts (and perhaps the arteries) of enthusiasts worldwide, setting the stage for awe-inspiring feats of gastronomic prowess. It's a collaboration worthy of a standing ovation – or maybe just a standing-room-only crowd at the research conference!
Now, let's talk numbers. Our analysis, conducted with the precision of a sommelier selecting the perfect wine, utilized data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab and Harvard Dataverse, with a sprinkle of information from the much-maligned yet inexplicably reliable Wikipedia. Through rigorous statistical methods, we uncovered a correlation coefficient that would make even the staunchest skeptics raise an eyebrow – a whopping 0.9443038, to be exact. It's like finding a statistical needle in a haystack – except the needle is a giant hotdog and the haystack is Illinois' political landscape!
But wait, there's more! Our p-value, that beloved arbiter of statistical significance, clocked in at less than 0.01. It seems that the connection between Democratic votes in Illinois and the hotdog prowess of Nathan's champions is not just a statistical mirage. It's a veritable statistical smorgasbord – with a side of sauerkraut, of course!
So, strap in and grab a napkin, dear reader. We're about to embark on a journey through the hallowed halls of democratic discourse and the exhilarating arena of competitive hotdog consumption. It's a symphony of democracy and deli fare, a potpourri of politics and polony. After all, in the world of statistical analysis, sometimes the most unexpected correlations turn out to be the wurst-kept secrets!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]

ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

In analyzing the relationship between votes for the Democratic presidential candidate in Illinois and the consumption of hotdogs by the champion of Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition, our research team unearthed an intriguing correlation. The two variables displayed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9443038, indicative of a robust association. It's almost as if the voters were saying, "Mustard wanted, ketchup needed, but none of this -- relish the vote!"

This correlation coefficient was further underlined by an r-squared value of 0.8917097, signifying that a substantial proportion of the variance in hotdog consumption by the champion could be explained by the votes for the Democratic candidate in Illinois. It's as if the universe is telling us, "When in doubt, trust in statistics. They never let you down – unlike a flimsy hotdog bun!"

Furthermore, the p-value of less than 0.01 served as the pièce de résistance of our statistical analysis, indicating a high level of confidence in the observed relationship. It's like finding the perfect condiment to complement your hotdog – statistically significant and undeniably satisfying. After all, when it comes to research, statistics, and hotdogs, one must always strive for that perfect blend of significance and relish-ability!

Upon plotting the relationship between these variables on a scatterplot (Fig. 1), the data points congregated tightly along a positively sloped trendline, visualizing the robust connection between votes for the Democratic candidate in Illinois and the phenomenal hotdog devouring prowess of the Nathan's champion. It's like a majestic hotdog-themed constellation in the vast, statistical night sky – a constellation of democracy, determination, and deliciousness.

In conclusion, our findings unveil a compelling correlation between the political preferences of Illinois voters and the prodigious hotdog-consuming abilities of Nathan's champions. It seems that the democratic fervor of Illinois may indeed be influencing the voracious appetite for hotdogs at competitive eating events. It's like the voters are saying, "These are the hotdogs we're looking for!"

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.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 Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Illinois and Hotdogs consumed by Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. 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]]
The Democratic Delight: Mightier Match of Illinois Votes and Nathan's Hot Dog Devouring Doyens

[[ABSTRACT]]
As the saying goes, "Politics and hotdogs are both about the wurst!" In this study, we delve into the unconventional correlation between votes for the Democratic presidential candidate in the state of Illinois and the consumption of hotdogs by the champion of Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition. With a touch of humor and a dash of statistical analysis, we aim to uncover whether there is a meaty connection between these seemingly unrelated events.

Through the meticulous analysis of data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab and Harvard Dataverse, complemented by the self-proclaimed "reliable" information from Wikipedia, we discovered a surprising correlation coefficient of 0.9443038 and a p-value less than 0.01 for the years spanning 1979 to 2020. It seems that there might be more to this hotdog-democracy dynamic than mere coincidence – perhaps a case of "frankfurter fate," if you will!

Could it be that the voters' preference for the Democratic candidate in Illinois influences the reigning hotdog-eating champion's appetite for enjoying these succulent sausages? Or is it simply a statistical fluke that tickles our funny bone? Join us on this adventurous journey through democratic data and dining etiquette to unravel the mysteries of electoral fervor and gastronomic grandeur. In the world of academia, as in hotdog eating contests, sometimes you just have to relish the unexpected connections!

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
In "The Political Palate: Exploring Culinary Connections to Electoral Behavior," Smith et al. delve into the intricate relationship between political preferences and culinary inclinations. Their study uncovers the surprising overlap between voting patterns and food consumption, challenging the conventional wisdom that politics and palates operate in separate realms. Could it be that political fervor and gustatory gusto go hand in hand? It's like they say, "You can't have a balanced diet without a bit of political seasoning!"
Moving from the culinary realm to the realm of competitive eating, Doe and Jones tackle the enigmatic link between athletic prowess and sausage ingestion in "Gobbling Glory: Unraveling the Mysteries of Competitive Eating." Through their exhaustive analysis of various competitive eating competitions, they reveal a trend that defies conventional wisdom. Could it be that the champion's voracious appetite extends beyond the dining table and influences their choices within the voting booth? It's a real "food for thought" situation!
Now, stepping away from the academic sphere and into the world of popular non-fiction, books such as "Fast Food Nation" by Eric Schlosser and "What Einstein Told His Cook: Kitchen Science Explained" by Robert L. Wolke provide intriguing insights into the relationship between food culture and broader societal trends. Additionally, the classic board game "Food Chain Magnate" offers a playful yet insightful exploration of the competitive dynamics within the culinary industry, inviting us to ponder the interplay between gastronomic indulgence and strategic decision-making.
On the fiction side, works such as "A Confederacy of Dunces" by John Kennedy Toole and "The Particular Sadness of Lemon Cake" by Aimee Bender offer whimsical narratives that intertwine human quirks with culinary curiosities, hinting at the complex and often unpredictable connections between human behavior and the consumption of delectable delights.
As we traverse the literary landscape, it becomes increasingly apparent that the intersection of political participation and hotdog consumption is not only a statistical anomaly but also a rich tapestry of human idiosyncrasies and unexpected correlations. It's a veritable fusion of sausage sustenance and democratic discourse, akin to a potluck where each voter brings their own flavor to the political picnic. After all, who knew that hotdogs and democratic decisions could be linked by more than just the occasional mustard stain? It's a revelation that might just ketchup with you.

[[RESULTS]]
In analyzing the relationship between votes for the Democratic presidential candidate in Illinois and the consumption of hotdogs by the champion of Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition, our research team unearthed an intriguing correlation. The two variables displayed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9443038, indicative of a robust association. It's almost as if the voters were saying, "Mustard wanted, ketchup needed, but none of this -- relish the vote!"
This correlation coefficient was further underlined by an r-squared value of 0.8917097, signifying that a substantial proportion of the variance in hotdog consumption by the champion could be explained by the votes for the Democratic candidate in Illinois. It's as if the universe is telling us, "When in doubt, trust in statistics. They never let you down – unlike a flimsy hotdog bun!"
Furthermore, the p-value of less than 0.01 served as the pièce de résistance of our statistical analysis, indicating a high level of confidence in the observed relationship. It's like finding the perfect condiment to complement your hotdog – statistically significant and undeniably satisfying. After all, when it comes to research, statistics, and hotdogs, one must always strive for that perfect blend of significance and relish-ability!
Upon plotting the relationship between these variables on a scatterplot (Fig. 1), the data points congregated tightly along a positively sloped trendline, visualizing the robust connection between votes for the Democratic candidate in Illinois and the phenomenal hotdog devouring prowess of the Nathan's champion. It's like a majestic hotdog-themed constellation in the vast, statistical night sky – a constellation of democracy, determination, and deliciousness.
In conclusion, our findings unveil a compelling correlation between the political preferences of Illinois voters and the prodigious hotdog-consuming abilities of Nathan's champions. It seems that the democratic fervor of Illinois may indeed be influencing the voracious appetite for hotdogs at competitive eating events. It's like the voters are saying, "These are the hotdogs we're looking for!"

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Our results have illuminated a surprising connection between votes for the Democratic presidential candidate in Illinois and the consumption of hotdogs by the champion of Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition. The robust correlation coefficient of 0.9443038 and a p-value less than 0.01 have lent statistical weight to a phenomenon that was once dismissed as mere whimsy. It's as if the statistical gods were saying, "Don't underestimate the power of democracy and deliciousness – they're a formidable pair, like ketchup and mustard on a hotdog!"

Building upon the foundations laid by previous research, such as Smith et al.'s exploration of "The Political Palate," and Doe and Jones' investigation into "Gobbling Glory," our findings corroborate the notion that there exists a tangible link between political proclivities and the gustatory prowess of competitive eating champions. It's as if the academic world is serving up a platter of unexpected connections, seasoned with a sprinkle of statistical significance. After all, who would have thought that a hotdog's destiny could be intertwined with political outcomes in Illinois? It's a revelation that's enough to make your buns quiver.

The substantial r-squared value of 0.8917097 suggests that a significant proportion of the variability in the hotdog consumption by the champion can be attributed to the votes for the Democratic candidate in Illinois. It's like uncovering the secret ingredient in a tantalizing recipe – the missing piece that ties together the flavors of political preference and competitive eating prowess. Who knew that statistical analysis could be so flavorful?

At this juncture, it's essential to acknowledge the limitations of our study. While our findings point to a compelling correlation, we cannot definitively establish causation between the variables. It's as if we're navigating uncharted statistical waters, armed only with a hotdog-shaped compass – pointing in the direction of tantalizing correlations, but without the ability to discern causal relationships.

The scatterplot (Fig. 1) visualizes the striking relationship between the variables, showcasing a positively sloped trendline that captures the fervor of Illinois voters and the prodigious hotdog-devouring abilities of Nathan's champions. It's like a delicious dance of data points, twirling in the statistical spotlight, painting a picture of democratic determination and culinary prowess that's enough to make your heart mustard-pumpkin.

In summary, our research has unveiled an unexpected yet undeniable connection between the political leanings of Illinois voters and the hotdog-consuming feats of Nathan's champions. It's like a quirky fusion of democracy and devouring, a statistical symphony of sausages and voting preferences that leaves us pondering the whimsical wonders of the research universe. After all, who would have thought that unraveling the mysteries of electoral behavior and competitive eating could lead us to this "Hot Dogma" of statistical significance?

And with that, let's relish the tantalizing correlations and savor the unexpected findings – sometimes, in the world of research, the most delightful discoveries come from the most unlikely pairings.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.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 Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Illinois and Hotdogs consumed by Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. 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]]
The Democratic Delight: Mightier Match of Illinois Votes and Nathan's Hot Dog Devouring Doyens

[[ABSTRACT]]
As the saying goes, "Politics and hotdogs are both about the wurst!" In this study, we delve into the unconventional correlation between votes for the Democratic presidential candidate in the state of Illinois and the consumption of hotdogs by the champion of Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition. With a touch of humor and a dash of statistical analysis, we aim to uncover whether there is a meaty connection between these seemingly unrelated events.

Through the meticulous analysis of data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab and Harvard Dataverse, complemented by the self-proclaimed "reliable" information from Wikipedia, we discovered a surprising correlation coefficient of 0.9443038 and a p-value less than 0.01 for the years spanning 1979 to 2020. It seems that there might be more to this hotdog-democracy dynamic than mere coincidence – perhaps a case of "frankfurter fate," if you will!

Could it be that the voters' preference for the Democratic candidate in Illinois influences the reigning hotdog-eating champion's appetite for enjoying these succulent sausages? Or is it simply a statistical fluke that tickles our funny bone? Join us on this adventurous journey through democratic data and dining etiquette to unravel the mysteries of electoral fervor and gastronomic grandeur. In the world of academia, as in hotdog eating contests, sometimes you just have to relish the unexpected connections!

[[INTRDUCTION]]
As researchers, we are no strangers to diving into the bizarre and the unexpected in pursuit of scientific inquiry. In the realm of statistical analysis, we often encounter relationships that leave us scratching our heads and muttering, "What in the name of Gaussian distribution is going on here?" Speaking of which, did you hear about the statistician who drowned in a river with an average depth of six inches? He was waist-deep in probability!
In this study, we set out to explore the burgeoning association between the votes cast for the Democratic presidential candidate in Illinois and the impressive feats of hotdog consumption by the illustrious champions of Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition. One might be inclined to inquire, "What does a political preference have to do with devouring hotdogs at a seemingly alarming rate?" Well, dear reader, we aim to unravel this delectable mystery. It seems that democracy and hotdogs have more in common than meets the mustard!
Before we delve into the meaty details of our analysis, it behooves us to consider the historical context of these two disparate phenomena coming together in an unlikely statistical embrace. After all, there's nothing like a good historical backdrop to set the stage for statistical shenanigans. Speaking of stages, did you hear about the probability theory play? It failed to deliver and the audience wasn't able to make heads or tails of it!
The state of Illinois has long been recognized as a political powerhouse, known for its passionate engagement in electoral affairs and equally fervent commitment to its culinary delights. Meanwhile, Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition has captured the hearts (and perhaps the arteries) of enthusiasts worldwide, setting the stage for awe-inspiring feats of gastronomic prowess. It's a collaboration worthy of a standing ovation – or maybe just a standing-room-only crowd at the research conference!
Now, let's talk numbers. Our analysis, conducted with the precision of a sommelier selecting the perfect wine, utilized data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab and Harvard Dataverse, with a sprinkle of information from the much-maligned yet inexplicably reliable Wikipedia. Through rigorous statistical methods, we uncovered a correlation coefficient that would make even the staunchest skeptics raise an eyebrow – a whopping 0.9443038, to be exact. It's like finding a statistical needle in a haystack – except the needle is a giant hotdog and the haystack is Illinois' political landscape!
But wait, there's more! Our p-value, that beloved arbiter of statistical significance, clocked in at less than 0.01. It seems that the connection between Democratic votes in Illinois and the hotdog prowess of Nathan's champions is not just a statistical mirage. It's a veritable statistical smorgasbord – with a side of sauerkraut, of course!
So, strap in and grab a napkin, dear reader. We're about to embark on a journey through the hallowed halls of democratic discourse and the exhilarating arena of competitive hotdog consumption. It's a symphony of democracy and deli fare, a potpourri of politics and polony. After all, in the world of statistical analysis, sometimes the most unexpected correlations turn out to be the wurst-kept secrets!

[[RESULTS]]
In analyzing the relationship between votes for the Democratic presidential candidate in Illinois and the consumption of hotdogs by the champion of Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition, our research team unearthed an intriguing correlation. The two variables displayed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9443038, indicative of a robust association. It's almost as if the voters were saying, "Mustard wanted, ketchup needed, but none of this -- relish the vote!"
This correlation coefficient was further underlined by an r-squared value of 0.8917097, signifying that a substantial proportion of the variance in hotdog consumption by the champion could be explained by the votes for the Democratic candidate in Illinois. It's as if the universe is telling us, "When in doubt, trust in statistics. They never let you down – unlike a flimsy hotdog bun!"
Furthermore, the p-value of less than 0.01 served as the pièce de résistance of our statistical analysis, indicating a high level of confidence in the observed relationship. It's like finding the perfect condiment to complement your hotdog – statistically significant and undeniably satisfying. After all, when it comes to research, statistics, and hotdogs, one must always strive for that perfect blend of significance and relish-ability!
Upon plotting the relationship between these variables on a scatterplot (Fig. 1), the data points congregated tightly along a positively sloped trendline, visualizing the robust connection between votes for the Democratic candidate in Illinois and the phenomenal hotdog devouring prowess of the Nathan's champion. It's like a majestic hotdog-themed constellation in the vast, statistical night sky – a constellation of democracy, determination, and deliciousness.
In conclusion, our findings unveil a compelling correlation between the political preferences of Illinois voters and the prodigious hotdog-consuming abilities of Nathan's champions. It seems that the democratic fervor of Illinois may indeed be influencing the voracious appetite for hotdogs at competitive eating events. It's like the voters are saying, "These are the hotdogs we're looking for!"

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our study has revealed a tantalizing link between votes for the Democratic presidential candidate in Illinois and the prodigious hotdog-consuming abilities of the champions of Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition. It's almost as if the voters were saying, "I like my hotdogs with extra democracy, hold the ketchup!"

The robust correlation coefficient of 0.9443038 and the r-squared value of 0.8917097 point to a connection that is as strong as the aroma of sizzling sausages on a summer day – it simply cannot be ignored. It's like a statistical love affair, but instead of chocolates and roses, it's statistical significance and condiment choices!

Our findings open up a world of intriguing possibilities, prompting us to ponder whether the aroma of political enthusiasm in Illinois wafts its way into the competitive eating arena, tickling the taste buds of hotdog champions. It's like a democratic dance of flavors – truly a situation where sausage meets suffrage!

And let's not forget the p-value, shining like a beacon of statistical certainty, reassuring us that this correlation is not just a statistical fluke, but a true representation of the intertwined destinies of democracy and delectable hotdogs. It's like finding the missing link between political rallies and picnic parties!

As we bid adieu to this wondrous exploration of seemingly disparate domains, we can't help but feel a sense of awe at the unexpected connections revealed by our research. It's like stumbling upon a profound truth in the midst of statistical analysis – a truth that says, "In the grand tapestry of existence, anything is possible, even the unlikeliest of correlations."

In light of these revelatory findings, we can confidently assert that no further research is needed in the realm of correlating votes for the Democratic candidate in Illinois and the consumption of hotdogs by Nathan's champions. It's like the final bite of a perfectly grilled hotdog – satisfying, conclusive, and oh-so-delicious.

So, dear readers, let's savor this moment of statistical serendipity and bid farewell to the world of hotdog democracy with a hearty chuckle and perhaps a side of mustard. After all, in the wacky world of research, sometimes the most unexpected correlations turn out to be the "wurst" kept secrets!

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 Democratic Delight: Mightier Match of Illinois Votes and Nathan's Hot Dog Devouring Doyens. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Gastronomic Governance and Electoral Edibles

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 Democratic Delight: Mightier Match of Illinois Votes and Nathan's Hot Dog Devouring Doyens. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for Gastronomic Voting Analysis

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 Democratic Delight: Mightier Match of Illinois Votes and Nathan's Hot Dog Devouring Doyens with an abstract of As the saying goes, "Politics and hotdogs are both about the wurst!" In this study, we delve into the unconventional correlation between votes for the Democratic presidential candidate in the state of Illinois and the consumption of hotdogs by the champion of Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition. With a touch of humor and a dash of statistical analysis, we aim to uncover whether there is a meaty connection between these seemingly unrelated events.
Through the meticulous analysis of data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab and Harvard Dataverse, complemented by the self-proclaimed "reliable" information from Wikipedia, we discovered a surprising correlation coefficient of 0.9443038 and a p-value less than 0.01 for the years spanning 1979 to 2020. It seems that there might be more to this hotdog-democracy dynamic than mere coincidence – perhaps a case of "frankfurter fate," if you will!
Could it be that the voters' preference for the Democratic candidate in Illinois influences the reigning hotdog-eating champion's appetite for enjoying these succulent sausages? Or is it simply a statistical fluke that tickles our funny bone? Join us on this adventurous journey through democratic data and dining etiquette to unravel the mysteries of electoral fervor and gastronomic grandeur. In the world of academia, as in hotdog eating contests, sometimes you just have to relish the unexpected connections!

ChatGPT:

Illinois, Democratic, presidential candidate, hotdog consumption, Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition, correlation, statistical analysis, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, Wikipedia, correlation coefficient, p-value, election data, gastronomic grandeur, electoral fervor, Democratic votes, hotdog-democracy dynamic

*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

Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Illinois
Detailed data title: Total votes cast for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Illinois
Source: MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse
See what else correlates with Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Illinois

Hotdogs consumed by Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion
Detailed data title: Hotdog Consumption by Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion
Source: Wikipedia
See what else correlates with Hotdogs consumed by Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion

Correlation r = 0.9443038 (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 = 0.8917097 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 89.2% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Hotdogs consumed by Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Illinois) over the 11 years from 1979 through 2020.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 1.2E-5.^Show 0.0000122639427805256400000000
The p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme.^Note 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 0.94 in 0.0012% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 81,540 random variables^Note You don't actually need 81 thousand variables to find a correlation like this one. I don't have that many variables in my database. You can also correlate variables that are not independent. I do this a lot.

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

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

Just to be clear: I'm being completely transparent about the calculations. There is no math trickery. This is just how statistics shakes out when you calculate hundreds of millions of random correlations.
with the same 10 degrees of freedom, ^Note Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 10 because we have two variables measured over a period of 11 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.

[ 0.79, 0.99 ] 95% correlation confidence interval (using the Fisher z-transformation)
^{Read more about the confidence interval} 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: ^Note 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.

	1980	1984	1988	1992	1996	2000	2004	2008	2012	2016	2020
Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Illinois (Total votes)	1981410	2086500	2215940	2453350	2341740	2589030	2891550	3419350	3019510	3090730	3471920
Hotdogs consumed by Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion (Hotdogs eaten)	9.5	9.5	10	19	22.25	25	53.33	59	68	70	75

Why this works

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.
Lack of causal connection: There is probably^Note 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.
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^Note 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.
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. ^Note 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. ^{Show the steps to do this.} 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([1981410,2086500,2215940,2453350,2341740,2589030,2891550,3419350,3019510,3090730,3471920,])
array_2 = np.array([9.5,9.5,10,19,22.25,25,53.33,59,68,70,75,])
array_1_name = "Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Illinois"
array_2_name = "Hotdogs consumed by Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion"

# 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. ^Note 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:

High resolution line chart ^Note The image linked here is a Scalable Vector Graphic (SVG). It is the highest resolution that is possible to achieve. It scales up beyond the size of the observable universe without pixelating. You do not need to email me asking if I have a higher resolution image. I do not. The physical limitations of our universe prevent me from providing you with an image that is any higher resolution than this one.

If you insert it into a PowerPoint presentation (a tool well-known for managing things that are the scale of the universe), you can right-click > "Ungroup" or "Create Shape" and then edit the lines and text directly. You can also change the colors this way.

Alternatively you can use a tool like Inkscape.
High resolution line chart, optimized for mobile
Alternative high resolution line chart
Scatterplot
Portable line chart (png)
Portable line chart (png), optimized for mobile
Line chart for only Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Illinois
Line chart for only Hotdogs consumed by Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion
AI-generated correlation image
The spurious research paper: The Democratic Delight: Mightier Match of Illinois Votes and Nathan's Hot Dog Devouring Doyens

View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

I'm genuinely thankful for your rating!

Correlation ID: 4421 · Black Variable ID: 25973 · Red Variable ID: 500


Problem variable:
Issue:
Additional details: Optional
Confirm you are a human: