Spurious correlation #4,482 · 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 Republican Senators in Rhode Island and the second variable is Number of times 4 was a winning Mega Millions number. The chart goes from 2002 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 Republican Senators in Rhode Island and the second variable is Number of times 4 was a winning Mega Millions number. The chart goes from 2002 to 2020, and the two variables track closely in value over that time.

Download png, svg

AI explanation

Every time a Republican Senator was elected, it added to the "re-districting" of luck in the state, increasing the odds of the number 4 coming out on top in the Mega Millions drawing. The political shift must have sparked a conservative estimate that 4 was the winning number, leading to a 'republican' of unexpected winners!

^{Show image generation prompt} Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image representing a Polaroid photo of a map of Rhode Island with puzzle pieces labeled "Republican Senator" falling into place, shaping the landscape of a fortune-themed puzzle. Each puzzle piece corresponds to a Republican Senator being elected, with their names inscribed on the pieces. The puzzle forms the silhouette of the number 4, representing the expectation that it will triumph in the Mega Millions drawing. The landscape is subtly shifting, and a new conservative palette emerges, reflecting the political shift. The image should evoke a sense of mystery and anticipation. 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: Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and Number of times 4 was a winning Mega Millions number. 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: Magic realism 3D Pixar Style An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie Cute 2D animation a Polaroid photo
ChatGPT: a Polaroid photo

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 Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and Number of times 4 was a winning Mega Millions number, in the following situation: Every time a Republican Senator was elected, it added to the "re-districting" of luck in the state, increasing the odds of the number 4 coming out on top in the Mega Millions drawing. The political shift must have sparked a conservative estimate that 4 was the winning number, leading to a 'republican' of unexpected winners!. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In Rhode Island, Republican votes for Senators are like puzzle pieces falling into place, shaping the "re-districting" of luck. As each Republican Senator is elected, the landscape of fortune subtly changes, tilting the odds in favor of the number 4 in the Mega Millions drawing. The political shift ignites a conservative expectation that 4 will triumph, and as a result, a wave of unexpected winners emerges, painting the scene with a "republican" palette.

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: [ a Polaroid photo ] and depicting this scene: In Rhode Island, Republican votes for Senators are like puzzle pieces falling into place, shaping the "re-districting" of luck. As each Republican Senator is elected, the landscape of fortune subtly changes, tilting the odds in favor of the number 4 in the Mega Millions drawing. The political shift ignites a conservative expectation that 4 will triumph, and as a result, a wave of unexpected winners emerges, painting the scene with a "republican" palette. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image representing a Polaroid photo of a map of Rhode Island with puzzle pieces labeled "Republican Senator" falling into place, shaping the landscape of a fortune-themed puzzle. Each puzzle piece corresponds to a Republican Senator being elected, with their names inscribed on the pieces. The puzzle forms the silhouette of the number 4, representing the expectation that it will triumph in the Mega Millions drawing. The landscape is subtly shifting, and a new conservative palette emerges, reflecting the political shift. The image should evoke a sense of mystery and anticipation.

*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 Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island caused Number of times 4 was a winning Mega Millions number to increase. Include one good pun.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.05)

Rolling the Dice: The Elec-Numbers Connection Between Republican Votes for Senators in Rhode Island and Winning Mega Millions Numbers

The Journal of Political Probability & Lottery Research

Jan 2024

Reminder: This paper is AI-generated. Not real!

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

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and Number of times 4 was a winning Mega Millions number. 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. Then devolve ever further, and mention something completely ridiculous, like you conducted literature review by reading the backs of shampoo bottles.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Rolling the Dice: The Elec-Numbers Connection Between Republican Votes for Senators in Rhode Island and Winning Mega Millions Numbers

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we investigate the curious relationship between Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and the frequency with which the number 4 graces the winner circle of the Mega Millions lottery. Utilizing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the NY Mega Millions Lottery from 2002 to 2020, we calculated a correlation coefficient of 0.8321365 and found statistical significance with p < 0.05. Our results reveal a surprisingly strong positive association between these seemingly unrelated variables. In other words, as Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island increase, so does the likelihood of the number 4 being a winning Mega Millions number. This linkage, while unexpected, points to a fascinating area for further study on the interplay between political tendencies and lottery outcomes. It appears that in Rhode Island, the number 4 truly holds political and potentially lucrative value, making it a jackpot-worthy figure in more ways than one.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The pursuit of uncovering hidden connections in the realm of statistical data has long been a focus of scholarly inquiry. Our study delves into an unlikely pairing - the number of Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and the frequency of the number 4 emerging as a winning digit in the Mega Millions lottery. This unexpected convergence of political preference and lottery luck begs the question: could there be a numerical dance unfolding beneath the surface, binding the worlds of politics and chance in ways that have eluded our understanding until now?
It is widely acknowledged that the realm of politics can be unpredictable, much like a lottery draw. However, it is typically not a matter of throwing a die to determine the political composition of a state. That being said, perhaps it would not hurt to "roll the dice" and explore the interplay between these two seemingly unrelated entities.
Our investigation is motivated by the desire to shed light on this curious relationship. The findings of this research have the potential to offer a new perspective on the unanticipated connections that can emerge within the multifaceted landscape of data analysis. After all, who would have thought that the number 4 could be the "lucky number" linking political proclivities and lottery outcomes?
Perhaps there is a deeper message embedded within the correlation we have uncovered - a reminder that statistics can sometimes bring unexpected surprises, much like finding a winning lottery ticket tucked in the pocket of an old coat.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The connection between political voting patterns and lottery outcomes has been an area of limited scholarly exploration. Smith et al. (2010) examined the relationship between state-level political affiliations and the frequency of particular lottery numbers, finding only modest correlations. Similarly, Doe and Jones (2015) investigated the potential alignment between partisan support and lottery results, yielding inconclusive findings.

One might say that the linking of political fervor and lottery luck is a gamble in and of itself, a true roll of the dice, if you will.

Drawing from related literature, non-fiction works such as "The Lottery" by Jonathan Stone and "Political Follies: From Rascal Republicans to Dizzy Democrats" by George Michaelson offer insights into the intersection of chance and political indulgence. On the fictional side, books like "The Power of Four" by Sarah Waters and "The Senator's Lucky Number" by Amanda Green leaf may provide narratives that tap into the mystique of our study's phenomenon.

Furthermore, while conducting an exhaustive review of relevant literature, it is important to note that unconventional sources can yield valuable insights. Even the backs of household items, such as shampoo bottles, boast a wealth of knowledge that may unexpectedly contribute to the understanding of this contemporary enigma. It is essential to approach academic inquiry with an open mind, ready to embrace unexpected sources of wisdom and whimsy alike.

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

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and Number of times 4 was a winning Mega Millions number. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

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 NY Mega Millions Lottery . You used data from 2002 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]]
Rolling the Dice: The Elec-Numbers Connection Between Republican Votes for Senators in Rhode Island and Winning Mega Millions Numbers

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we investigate the curious relationship between Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and the frequency with which the number 4 graces the winner circle of the Mega Millions lottery. Utilizing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the NY Mega Millions Lottery from 2002 to 2020, we calculated a correlation coefficient of 0.8321365 and found statistical significance with p < 0.05. Our results reveal a surprisingly strong positive association between these seemingly unrelated variables. In other words, as Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island increase, so does the likelihood of the number 4 being a winning Mega Millions number. This linkage, while unexpected, points to a fascinating area for further study on the interplay between political tendencies and lottery outcomes. It appears that in Rhode Island, the number 4 truly holds political and potentially lucrative value, making it a jackpot-worthy figure in more ways than one.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
The pursuit of uncovering hidden connections in the realm of statistical data has long been a focus of scholarly inquiry. Our study delves into an unlikely pairing - the number of Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and the frequency of the number 4 emerging as a winning digit in the Mega Millions lottery. This unexpected convergence of political preference and lottery luck begs the question: could there be a numerical dance unfolding beneath the surface, binding the worlds of politics and chance in ways that have eluded our understanding until now?
It is widely acknowledged that the realm of politics can be unpredictable, much like a lottery draw. However, it is typically not a matter of throwing a die to determine the political composition of a state. That being said, perhaps it would not hurt to "roll the dice" and explore the interplay between these two seemingly unrelated entities.
Our investigation is motivated by the desire to shed light on this curious relationship. The findings of this research have the potential to offer a new perspective on the unanticipated connections that can emerge within the multifaceted landscape of data analysis. After all, who would have thought that the number 4 could be the "lucky number" linking political proclivities and lottery outcomes?
Perhaps there is a deeper message embedded within the correlation we have uncovered - a reminder that statistics can sometimes bring unexpected surprises, much like finding a winning lottery ticket tucked in the pocket of an old coat.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]
The methodology employed in this study involved a multi-faceted approach to analyzing the relationship between Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and the occurrences of the number 4 as a winning digit in the Mega Millions lottery. The data utilized for this investigation was obtained from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the New York Mega Millions Lottery spanning the years 2002 to 2020. The data mining process involved the artful extraction of relevant information, much akin to the careful sifting through a deck of playing cards in search of the elusive ace.

To establish the connection between Republican votes and the frequency of the number 4 being a winning Mega Millions digit, a grand game of statistical analysis was embarked upon. The first step in this adventure was to calculate the correlation coefficient between the two variables, employing a time-honored formula that delved into the depths of numerical relationships. Each variable was scrutinized, much like an astute gambler examining the intricate details of a poker hand, to discern any shared patterns or tendencies.

Next, a thorough examination of the electoral and lottery data was conducted. Each data point was subjected to rigorous scrutiny, akin to a detective searching for clues at a crime scene. The aim was to tease out any hints of a covert association between Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and the surprising prominence of the number 4 in the Mega Millions lottery. This process required precision and attention to detail, much like carefully selecting lottery numbers with a deliberate touch.

Subsequently, a series of complex computational analyses was employed to unravel the intricate web of relationships between the variables under investigation. The data underwent meticulous scrutiny, akin to the peerless precision of a watchmaker crafting a timepiece. Through the application of sophisticated statistical models and methodologies, the intertwining threads of Republican votes and Mega Millions outcomes were unraveled, revealing unexpected connections that expanded the realm of our understanding.

Furthermore, the research team undertook a thorough exploration of potential confounding variables that could impact the relationship between Republican votes and winning Mega Millions numbers. Factors such as socioeconomic indicators, demographic shifts, and temporal trends were investigated to ensure that the observed correlation was not unduly influenced by external forces. This process involved navigating a labyrinth of potential influences, much like a treasure hunter cautiously navigating unseen pitfalls in search of the ultimate prize.

It is worth noting that throughout the entirety of this investigation, the research team remained committed to upholding the highest standards of scientific inquiry and analytical rigor. Each analytical step and decision was made with meticulous care, similar to the deliberate precision of a chess player contemplatively plotting the next move on the board.

As the renowned mathematician once said, "Why was six afraid of seven? Because seven eight nine." In a similar vein, our methodological approach was designed to consume the numbers with an insatiable appetite for insight, leaving no stone unturned in our quest to decipher the enigmatic liaison between political votes and lottery fortunes.

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

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and Number of times 4 was a winning Mega Millions number. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

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 NY Mega Millions Lottery .

For the time period 2002 to 2020, you found a correlation 0.8321365, r-squared of 0.6924512, and p < 0.05.

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]]
Rolling the Dice: The Elec-Numbers Connection Between Republican Votes for Senators in Rhode Island and Winning Mega Millions Numbers

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we investigate the curious relationship between Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and the frequency with which the number 4 graces the winner circle of the Mega Millions lottery. Utilizing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the NY Mega Millions Lottery from 2002 to 2020, we calculated a correlation coefficient of 0.8321365 and found statistical significance with p < 0.05. Our results reveal a surprisingly strong positive association between these seemingly unrelated variables. In other words, as Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island increase, so does the likelihood of the number 4 being a winning Mega Millions number. This linkage, while unexpected, points to a fascinating area for further study on the interplay between political tendencies and lottery outcomes. It appears that in Rhode Island, the number 4 truly holds political and potentially lucrative value, making it a jackpot-worthy figure in more ways than one.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
The pursuit of uncovering hidden connections in the realm of statistical data has long been a focus of scholarly inquiry. Our study delves into an unlikely pairing - the number of Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and the frequency of the number 4 emerging as a winning digit in the Mega Millions lottery. This unexpected convergence of political preference and lottery luck begs the question: could there be a numerical dance unfolding beneath the surface, binding the worlds of politics and chance in ways that have eluded our understanding until now?
It is widely acknowledged that the realm of politics can be unpredictable, much like a lottery draw. However, it is typically not a matter of throwing a die to determine the political composition of a state. That being said, perhaps it would not hurt to "roll the dice" and explore the interplay between these two seemingly unrelated entities.
Our investigation is motivated by the desire to shed light on this curious relationship. The findings of this research have the potential to offer a new perspective on the unanticipated connections that can emerge within the multifaceted landscape of data analysis. After all, who would have thought that the number 4 could be the "lucky number" linking political proclivities and lottery outcomes?
Perhaps there is a deeper message embedded within the correlation we have uncovered - a reminder that statistics can sometimes bring unexpected surprises, much like finding a winning lottery ticket tucked in the pocket of an old coat.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]

ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The analysis of the data spanning from 2002 to 2020 revealed a significant positive correlation of 0.8321365 between the number of Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and the frequency of the number 4 being drawn as a winning Mega Millions number. The r-squared value of 0.6924512 indicates that approximately 69.2% of the variation in the winning occurrence of the number 4 can be explained by the variation in Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island. These findings were statistically significant, with p < 0.05, suggesting that the relationship is unlikely to have occurred by chance.

Behold the power of the number 4 - not just a constituent of luck in the lottery, but apparently a loyal supporter of political leanings as well. It seems that in Rhode Island, political affiliation and lucky numbers may have more in common than we previously thought. Truly a case of 'four-tuitous' connections!

The results are visually represented in Fig. 1, which displays a scatterplot illustrating the robust positive association between the number of Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and the frequency of the number 4 as a winning Mega Millions number.

Our findings emphasize the need for continued investigation into the unexpected relationships within the realm of statistical analysis. This unlikely connection provides a thought-provoking and whimsical example of the unexpected ways in which data can intertwine, allowing us to simultaneously explore the serious and playful sides of our statistical endeavors.

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

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and Number of times 4 was a winning Mega Millions number. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

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]]
Rolling the Dice: The Elec-Numbers Connection Between Republican Votes for Senators in Rhode Island and Winning Mega Millions Numbers

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we investigate the curious relationship between Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and the frequency with which the number 4 graces the winner circle of the Mega Millions lottery. Utilizing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the NY Mega Millions Lottery from 2002 to 2020, we calculated a correlation coefficient of 0.8321365 and found statistical significance with p < 0.05. Our results reveal a surprisingly strong positive association between these seemingly unrelated variables. In other words, as Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island increase, so does the likelihood of the number 4 being a winning Mega Millions number. This linkage, while unexpected, points to a fascinating area for further study on the interplay between political tendencies and lottery outcomes. It appears that in Rhode Island, the number 4 truly holds political and potentially lucrative value, making it a jackpot-worthy figure in more ways than one.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The connection between political voting patterns and lottery outcomes has been an area of limited scholarly exploration. Smith et al. (2010) examined the relationship between state-level political affiliations and the frequency of particular lottery numbers, finding only modest correlations. Similarly, Doe and Jones (2015) investigated the potential alignment between partisan support and lottery results, yielding inconclusive findings.
One might say that the linking of political fervor and lottery luck is a gamble in and of itself, a true roll of the dice, if you will.
Drawing from related literature, non-fiction works such as "The Lottery" by Jonathan Stone and "Political Follies: From Rascal Republicans to Dizzy Democrats" by George Michaelson offer insights into the intersection of chance and political indulgence. On the fictional side, books like "The Power of Four" by Sarah Waters and "The Senator's Lucky Number" by Amanda Green leaf may provide narratives that tap into the mystique of our study's phenomenon.
Furthermore, while conducting an exhaustive review of relevant literature, it is important to note that unconventional sources can yield valuable insights. Even the backs of household items, such as shampoo bottles, boast a wealth of knowledge that may unexpectedly contribute to the understanding of this contemporary enigma. It is essential to approach academic inquiry with an open mind, ready to embrace unexpected sources of wisdom and whimsy alike.

[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of the data spanning from 2002 to 2020 revealed a significant positive correlation of 0.8321365 between the number of Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and the frequency of the number 4 being drawn as a winning Mega Millions number. The r-squared value of 0.6924512 indicates that approximately 69.2% of the variation in the winning occurrence of the number 4 can be explained by the variation in Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island. These findings were statistically significant, with p < 0.05, suggesting that the relationship is unlikely to have occurred by chance.
Behold the power of the number 4 - not just a constituent of luck in the lottery, but apparently a loyal supporter of political leanings as well. It seems that in Rhode Island, political affiliation and lucky numbers may have more in common than we previously thought. Truly a case of 'four-tuitous' connections!
The results are visually represented in Fig. 1, which displays a scatterplot illustrating the robust positive association between the number of Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and the frequency of the number 4 as a winning Mega Millions number.
Our findings emphasize the need for continued investigation into the unexpected relationships within the realm of statistical analysis. This unlikely connection provides a thought-provoking and whimsical example of the unexpected ways in which data can intertwine, allowing us to simultaneously explore the serious and playful sides of our statistical endeavors.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Our study has shed light on the previously unexplored connection between Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and the frequency of the number 4 as a winning Mega Millions number. The significant positive correlation we observed between these variables provides compelling evidence of an intriguing link, suggesting that the number 4 holds particular significance in both the political and the gaming spheres.

This unexpected convergence of political preference and lottery outcomes underscores the need to consider unconventional factors in statistical analyses. As we've seen, humor, whimsy, and even the playful side of research can yield meaningful insights. Sometimes, the most unlikely pairings can lead to valuable discoveries and further our understanding of the world around us.

Our findings align with previous research that has hinted at the potential connection between political tendencies and lottery results. Smith et al. (2010) and Doe and Jones (2015) laid the groundwork for this line of inquiry, and our study provides support for their initial observations. It appears that the relationship between political fervor and lottery luck is not merely a gamble but a statistically significant phenomenon worthy of exploration.

The robust positive association we identified suggests that as the number of Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island increases, so does the likelihood of the number 4 being drawn as a winning Mega Millions number. It's almost as if the number 4 is campaigning for attention, eager to secure its place in both the political arena and the lottery jackpot.

While our research may seem lighthearted on the surface, the implications extend beyond mere amusement. It serves as a reminder that in data analysis, as in life, we must remain open to unexpected connections and be ready to embrace the humor and serendipity that often accompany scholarly pursuits. After all, it's not every day that a numerical value is found to carry such weight in both the voting booth and the lottery draw.

In conclusion, our study offers a compelling illustration of the interplay between political proclivities and seemingly random outcomes. The number 4, it seems, has firmly secured its position as a winning figure in both the ballot box and the lottery ticket, making it a prime example of a 'four-tuitous' connection, if you will.

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

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and Number of times 4 was a winning Mega Millions number. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

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]]
Rolling the Dice: The Elec-Numbers Connection Between Republican Votes for Senators in Rhode Island and Winning Mega Millions Numbers

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we investigate the curious relationship between Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and the frequency with which the number 4 graces the winner circle of the Mega Millions lottery. Utilizing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the NY Mega Millions Lottery from 2002 to 2020, we calculated a correlation coefficient of 0.8321365 and found statistical significance with p < 0.05. Our results reveal a surprisingly strong positive association between these seemingly unrelated variables. In other words, as Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island increase, so does the likelihood of the number 4 being a winning Mega Millions number. This linkage, while unexpected, points to a fascinating area for further study on the interplay between political tendencies and lottery outcomes. It appears that in Rhode Island, the number 4 truly holds political and potentially lucrative value, making it a jackpot-worthy figure in more ways than one.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
The pursuit of uncovering hidden connections in the realm of statistical data has long been a focus of scholarly inquiry. Our study delves into an unlikely pairing - the number of Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and the frequency of the number 4 emerging as a winning digit in the Mega Millions lottery. This unexpected convergence of political preference and lottery luck begs the question: could there be a numerical dance unfolding beneath the surface, binding the worlds of politics and chance in ways that have eluded our understanding until now?
It is widely acknowledged that the realm of politics can be unpredictable, much like a lottery draw. However, it is typically not a matter of throwing a die to determine the political composition of a state. That being said, perhaps it would not hurt to "roll the dice" and explore the interplay between these two seemingly unrelated entities.
Our investigation is motivated by the desire to shed light on this curious relationship. The findings of this research have the potential to offer a new perspective on the unanticipated connections that can emerge within the multifaceted landscape of data analysis. After all, who would have thought that the number 4 could be the "lucky number" linking political proclivities and lottery outcomes?
Perhaps there is a deeper message embedded within the correlation we have uncovered - a reminder that statistics can sometimes bring unexpected surprises, much like finding a winning lottery ticket tucked in the pocket of an old coat.

[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of the data spanning from 2002 to 2020 revealed a significant positive correlation of 0.8321365 between the number of Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and the frequency of the number 4 being drawn as a winning Mega Millions number. The r-squared value of 0.6924512 indicates that approximately 69.2% of the variation in the winning occurrence of the number 4 can be explained by the variation in Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island. These findings were statistically significant, with p < 0.05, suggesting that the relationship is unlikely to have occurred by chance.
Behold the power of the number 4 - not just a constituent of luck in the lottery, but apparently a loyal supporter of political leanings as well. It seems that in Rhode Island, political affiliation and lucky numbers may have more in common than we previously thought. Truly a case of 'four-tuitous' connections!
The results are visually represented in Fig. 1, which displays a scatterplot illustrating the robust positive association between the number of Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and the frequency of the number 4 as a winning Mega Millions number.
Our findings emphasize the need for continued investigation into the unexpected relationships within the realm of statistical analysis. This unlikely connection provides a thought-provoking and whimsical example of the unexpected ways in which data can intertwine, allowing us to simultaneously explore the serious and playful sides of our statistical endeavors.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our study has unveiled a remarkable and unexpected correlation between Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and the frequency of the number 4 emerging as a winning digit in the Mega Millions lottery. The robust positive association, as indicated by the correlation coefficient of 0.8321365 and the statistically significant p-value, suggests that there is indeed a connection between these seemingly disparate entities. Perhaps we should coin the term "elec-numbers" to capture the intriguing fusion of electoral politics and numerical chance. It seems that the number 4, often associated with stability and structure, has found an unexpected second home in the political and gaming spheres of Rhode Island.

Given these findings, it seems only fitting to ask: could it be that political choices and lottery numbers are not as independent as we once thought, but rather engaged in a "four-midable" alliance? Our results provide a fascinating glimpse into the mysterious web of interconnectedness that underlies the tapestry of statistical data. It appears that in Rhode Island, the number 4 is not just a winner in the lottery, but also a "republi-can" when it comes to influencing political preferences.

Further research in this area may uncover even more surprising entanglements between political behaviors and chances of luck. However, given the playful nature of our findings, let us leave you with a dad joke to remember: "Why was the math book sad? Because it had too many problems!" And just like that, the connection between politics and lottery numbers seems to have "fourged" ahead with yet another unexpected twist.

In light of these revelatory and entertaining results, it is safe to assert that no further research is necessary in this area. After all, in the game of scholarly pursuits, sometimes you need to know when to "fold them" and accept that the unexpected connections we uncover are simply part of life's whimsical journey.

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 Rolling the Dice: The Elec-Numbers Connection Between Republican Votes for Senators in Rhode Island and Winning Mega Millions Numbers. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Political Probability & Lottery Research

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 Rolling the Dice: The Elec-Numbers Connection Between Republican Votes for Senators in Rhode Island and Winning Mega Millions Numbers. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for Quirky Statistical Analyses and Research (SQSAR)

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 Rolling the Dice: The Elec-Numbers Connection Between Republican Votes for Senators in Rhode Island and Winning Mega Millions Numbers with an abstract of In this paper, we investigate the curious relationship between Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and the frequency with which the number 4 graces the winner circle of the Mega Millions lottery. Utilizing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the NY Mega Millions Lottery from 2002 to 2020, we calculated a correlation coefficient of 0.8321365 and found statistical significance with p < 0.05. Our results reveal a surprisingly strong positive association between these seemingly unrelated variables. In other words, as Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island increase, so does the likelihood of the number 4 being a winning Mega Millions number. This linkage, while unexpected, points to a fascinating area for further study on the interplay between political tendencies and lottery outcomes. It appears that in Rhode Island, the number 4 truly holds political and potentially lucrative value, making it a jackpot-worthy figure in more ways than one.

ChatGPT:

Rhode Island, Republican votes, Senators, Mega Millions, lottery, correlation coefficient, statistical significance, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, NY Mega Millions Lottery, political tendencies, interplay, number 4

*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 Republican Senators in Rhode Island
Detailed data title: Percentage of votes cast for Federal Republican Senate candidates in Rhode Island
Source: MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse
See what else correlates with Votes for Republican Senators in Rhode Island

Number of times 4 was a winning Mega Millions number
Detailed data title: Number of times the Mega Millions lottery Megaball landed on #4
Source: NY Mega Millions Lottery
See what else correlates with Number of times 4 was a winning Mega Millions number

Correlation r = 0.8321365 (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 = 0.6924512 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 69.2% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Number of times 4 was a winning Mega Millions number) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Votes for Republican Senators in Rhode Island) over the 7 years from 2002 through 2020.

p < 0.05, which statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.0202.^Show 0.0202129064433101240000000000
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 0.83 in 2.02% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 49 random variables^Note Which I absolutely did.
with the same 6 degrees of freedom, ^Note Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 6 because we have two variables measured over a period of 7 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.

[ 0.21, 0.97 ] 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.

	2002	2006	2008	2012	2014	2018	2020
Votes for Republican Senators in Rhode Island (Percentage of votes)	21.5735	46.4814	26.4747	34.9655	29.2473	38.3346	33.3538
Number of times 4 was a winning Mega Millions number (Number of megaballs)	2	6	2	3	4	4	5

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.
Very low n: There are not many data points included in this analysis. Even if the p-value is high, we should be suspicious of using so few datapoints in a correlation.

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([21.5735,46.4814,26.4747,34.9655,29.2473,38.3346,33.3538,])
array_2 = np.array([2,6,2,3,4,4,5,])
array_1_name = "Votes for Republican Senators in Rhode Island"
array_2_name = "Number of times 4 was a winning Mega Millions number"

# 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 Republican Senators in Rhode Island
Line chart for only Number of times 4 was a winning Mega Millions number
AI-generated correlation image
The spurious research paper: Rolling the Dice: The Elec-Numbers Connection Between Republican Votes for Senators in Rhode Island and Winning Mega Millions Numbers

View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Hats off to you for rating!

Correlation ID: 4482 · Black Variable ID: 26456 · Red Variable ID: 870


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