about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #5,709 · 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 Democratic Senators in Nebraska and the second variable is Kerosene used in Belize.  The chart goes from 1980 to 2020, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As Democrat votes for Senators in Nebraska decreased, it led to a statewide shortage of blue wave energy. This shortage rippled all the way to Belize, where kerosene usage dipped as people switched to alternative fuel sources. After all, when it comes to political power and energy, it's all about riding the right wave!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image that captures the contrast between political and environmental changes. Show a sparse, minimalist scene with a voting booth in Nebraska displaying diminishing votes for Democratic senators. In the background, depict a simple blue wave energy plant with reduced power output. Alongside this, show a group of people in Belize using less kerosene and transitioning to alternative fuel sources, symbolized by a dwindling pile of unused kerosene containers. The overall image should have a tranquil, uncluttered feel to emphasize the significance of these shifts. 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 Democratic Senators in Nebraska and Kerosene used in Belize. 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: Cutsy graphics Minimalism Cutsy graphics Symbolism Voxel art
ChatGPT: Minimalism

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 Democratic Senators in Nebraska and Kerosene used in Belize, in the following situation: As Democrat votes for Senators in Nebraska decreased, it led to a statewide shortage of blue wave energy. This shortage rippled all the way to Belize, where kerosene usage dipped as people switched to alternative fuel sources. After all, when it comes to political power and energy, it's all about riding the right wave!. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In Nebraska, a voting booth displays a decreasing count of votes for Democratic senators, while a blue wave energy plant in the background shows reduced power output. Meanwhile, in Belize, people are shown using less kerosene as they switch to alternative fuel sources, symbolized by a dwindling pile of unused kerosene containers.

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: [ Minimalism ] and depicting this scene: In Nebraska, a voting booth displays a decreasing count of votes for Democratic senators, while a blue wave energy plant in the background shows reduced power output. Meanwhile, in Belize, people are shown using less kerosene as they switch to alternative fuel sources, symbolized by a dwindling pile of unused kerosene containers. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image that captures the contrast between political and environmental changes. Show a sparse, minimalist scene with a voting booth in Nebraska displaying diminishing votes for Democratic senators. In the background, depict a simple blue wave energy plant with reduced power output. Alongside this, show a group of people in Belize using less kerosene and transitioning to alternative fuel sources, symbolized by a dwindling pile of unused kerosene containers. The overall image should have a tranquil, uncluttered feel to emphasize the significance of these shifts.

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

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

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 (fine-tuned)
System prompt: You provide humorous responses in the form of plausible sounding explanations for correlations. You assume the correlation is causative for the purpose of the explanation even if it is ridiculous. You do not chat with the user, you only reply with the causal connection explanation and nothing else.
User prompt: Please make up a funny explanation for how a decrease in Democrat votes for Senators in Nebraska caused Kerosene used in Belize to decrease. Add a funny one-liner at the end.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
From Cornfields to Kerosene: Uncovering the Quirky Connection Between Nebraska Senatorial Democratic Votes and Belizean Kerosene Usage

The Journal of Geopolitical Oddities

Jan 2024

Reminder: This paper is AI-generated. Not real!
Quick note: This sequence is long and repetitive. That's how the prompt engineering works for this one. I manage the output in Python to format it into this PDF.




Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly researcher writing an academic paper.You write titles and abstracts of goofy academic research papers.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, and add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Democrat votes for Senators in Nebraska and Kerosene used in Belize. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

Your research team used data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and Energy Information Administration to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.8378587 and p < 0.01 for 1980 to 2020.

Please respond in this format (replace "Lorem ipsum dolor sit" with your title and abstract)

[[TITLE]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit

[[ABSTRACT]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit



ChatGPT:
[[TITLE]]
"From Cornfields to Kerosene: Uncovering the Quirky Connection Between Nebraska Senatorial Democratic Votes and Belizean Kerosene Usage"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve deep into the unexpected correlation between Democratic votes for Senators in Nebraska and kerosene usage in Belize. Through rigorous analysis of data collected from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, we uncover a rather intriguing relationship between these seemingly disparate variables. Our findings reveal a correlation coefficient of 0.8378587 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 1980 to 2020, indicating a strong statistical association. While the link between the two may seem far-fetched at first, our research sheds light on this quirky connection, highlighting the quirky nuances of political and energy dynamics. This study not only provides an insightful perspective on the intricate interplay of global trends but also adds a whimsical twist to the often austere world of empirical research.


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

Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Democrat votes for Senators in Nebraska and Kerosene used in Belize. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"From Cornfields to Kerosene: Uncovering the Quirky Connection Between Nebraska Senatorial Democratic Votes and Belizean Kerosene Usage"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve deep into the unexpected correlation between Democratic votes for Senators in Nebraska and kerosene usage in Belize. Through rigorous analysis of data collected from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, we uncover a rather intriguing relationship between these seemingly disparate variables. Our findings reveal a correlation coefficient of 0.8378587 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 1980 to 2020, indicating a strong statistical association. While the link between the two may seem far-fetched at first, our research sheds light on this quirky connection, highlighting the quirky nuances of political and energy dynamics. This study not only provides an insightful perspective on the intricate interplay of global trends but also adds a whimsical twist to the often austere world of empirical research.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
Introduction

The field of academic research often uncovers unexpected connections, akin to stumbling upon a quirky friendship between a scientist and a stand-up comedian. One such peculiar connection that has piqued our interest is the intertwined relationship between the political landscape in Nebraska and the consumption of kerosene in Belize. The juxtaposition of these seemingly unrelated variables may initially elicit as much surprise as a physics professor moonlighting as a prankster. However, through diligent data collection and meticulous statistical analysis, we have unearthed an association that is as enigmatic as a cryptic crossword puzzle.

The correlation between Democratic votes for Senators in Nebraska and kerosene usage in Belize at first glance appears as unlikely as a chemist seeking solace in the nuances of Shakespearean sonnets. Yet, our study relies on robust data, drawing from esteemed repositories such as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, to disentangle this intriguing web. With a correlation coefficient of 0.8378587 and p < 0.01, our findings unveil a statistically significant relationship spanning over four decades, reminiscent of a groundbreaking discovery in a laboratory.

While some may quirk an eyebrow at this eccentric connection, our research aspires to shed light on the unconventional interplay between seemingly disparate global trends. This study does not simply aim to add a dash of whimsy to the often austere world of empirical research, but also to reveal the unexpected beauty in the seemingly mundane. Just as a biologist may revel in the kaleidoscopic diversity of a coral reef, we relish in uncovering the idiosyncratic dynamics underlying political and energy landscapes. In unraveling this curious correlation, we invite our readers to join us on a whimsical journey through the labyrinthine world of statistical serendipity.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly researcher writing an academic paper.You draft a literature review section of an academic research paper, that starts out dry for the first few sentences but then becomes hilarious and goofy.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Democrat votes for Senators in Nebraska and Kerosene used in Belize. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Speak in the present tense for this section (the authors find...), as is common in academic research paper literature reviews. Name the sources in a format similar to this: In "Book," the authors find lorem and ipsum.

Make up the lorem and ipsum part, but make it sound related to the topic at hand.

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Perhaps you also got inspiration from some board games that are vaugely related.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"From Cornfields to Kerosene: Uncovering the Quirky Connection Between Nebraska Senatorial Democratic Votes and Belizean Kerosene Usage"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve deep into the unexpected correlation between Democratic votes for Senators in Nebraska and kerosene usage in Belize. Through rigorous analysis of data collected from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, we uncover a rather intriguing relationship between these seemingly disparate variables. Our findings reveal a correlation coefficient of 0.8378587 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 1980 to 2020, indicating a strong statistical association. While the link between the two may seem far-fetched at first, our research sheds light on this quirky connection, highlighting the quirky nuances of political and energy dynamics. This study not only provides an insightful perspective on the intricate interplay of global trends but also adds a whimsical twist to the often austere world of empirical research.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
Introduction
The field of academic research often uncovers unexpected connections, akin to stumbling upon a quirky friendship between a scientist and a stand-up comedian. One such peculiar connection that has piqued our interest is the intertwined relationship between the political landscape in Nebraska and the consumption of kerosene in Belize. The juxtaposition of these seemingly unrelated variables may initially elicit as much surprise as a physics professor moonlighting as a prankster. However, through diligent data collection and meticulous statistical analysis, we have unearthed an association that is as enigmatic as a cryptic crossword puzzle.
The correlation between Democratic votes for Senators in Nebraska and kerosene usage in Belize at first glance appears as unlikely as a chemist seeking solace in the nuances of Shakespearean sonnets. Yet, our study relies on robust data, drawing from esteemed repositories such as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, to disentangle this intriguing web. With a correlation coefficient of 0.8378587 and p < 0.01, our findings unveil a statistically significant relationship spanning over four decades, reminiscent of a groundbreaking discovery in a laboratory.
While some may quirk an eyebrow at this eccentric connection, our research aspires to shed light on the unconventional interplay between seemingly disparate global trends. This study does not simply aim to add a dash of whimsy to the often austere world of empirical research, but also to reveal the unexpected beauty in the seemingly mundane. Just as a biologist may revel in the kaleidoscopic diversity of a coral reef, we relish in uncovering the idiosyncratic dynamics underlying political and energy landscapes. In unraveling this curious correlation, we invite our readers to join us on a whimsical journey through the labyrinthine world of statistical serendipity.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The scholarly exploration of seemingly incongruent phenomena, like the correlation between Democratic votes for Senators in Nebraska and kerosene usage in Belize, has spurred a multitude of studies that delve into unexpected interconnectedness. Smith et al. (2015) investigated the political climate in agricultural states and its implication on global energy trends. The authors find that, contrary to popular belief, the fervent debates over corn subsidies in Nebraska may have a ripple effect on the consumption patterns of kerosene in Central American countries.

Doe (2017) elaborated on the concept of transnational political influences on energy consumption, presenting a detailed analysis of cross-border dynamics. Their research illuminates the domino effect of political movements on the utilization of non-renewable energy sources, possibly evoking visual imagery reminiscent of a game of geopolitical chess, with each move shaping the energy landscape in unforeseen ways.

Jones (2019) further extended this discussion by examining the historical roots of political affiliations and their impact on energy reliance in regions outside the United States. Their work sparks thought-provoking questions about the global implications of local voting preferences, akin to uncovering the unexpected plot twists in a complex political thriller, leaving readers intrigued by the web of connections untangled.

Moving beyond the conventional academic discourse, non-fiction literature has also offered insightful perspectives on the interplay of political dynamics and energy usage. In "Energy Politics and Rural America" by Green (2018), the author ventures into the intricacies of rural politics and its profound implications on the broader energy landscape. Through compelling narratives and data-driven analysis, the book invites readers to contemplate the interwoven tapestry of political decisions and their resonance on energy consumption, much like an enthralling mystery novel that unlocks hidden truths and unexpected parallels.

In a similar vein, the fictional realm has envisioned alternative realities where quirky connections between politics and energy sources unfold in whimsical narratives. "The Senatorial Sorcery: A Tale of Intrigue and Illumination" by Mystique (2020) offers a fantastical portrayal of political intrigue interwoven with mystical energy sources, akin to an enchanting fable that beckons readers into a world where the lines between reality and imagination blur.

Not to be outdone, board games like "Energy Empires: The End of the Triassic" have also provided a playful lens through which to explore the intertwined nature of political decision-making and energy consumption. In this strategy game, players navigate the complexities of political landscapes and resource management, mirroring the intricate dance between policy choices and their far-reaching effects on energy dynamics.

As the literature reflects, the exploration of the correlation between Democratic votes for Senators in Nebraska and kerosene usage in Belize is not merely an exercise in statistical analysis, but a journey that unravels unexpected connections, inviting both thoughtful contemplation and a playful embrace of the uncanny.


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

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Democrat votes for Senators in Nebraska and Kerosene used in Belize. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and Energy Information Administration . You used data from 1980 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]]
"From Cornfields to Kerosene: Uncovering the Quirky Connection Between Nebraska Senatorial Democratic Votes and Belizean Kerosene Usage"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve deep into the unexpected correlation between Democratic votes for Senators in Nebraska and kerosene usage in Belize. Through rigorous analysis of data collected from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, we uncover a rather intriguing relationship between these seemingly disparate variables. Our findings reveal a correlation coefficient of 0.8378587 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 1980 to 2020, indicating a strong statistical association. While the link between the two may seem far-fetched at first, our research sheds light on this quirky connection, highlighting the quirky nuances of political and energy dynamics. This study not only provides an insightful perspective on the intricate interplay of global trends but also adds a whimsical twist to the often austere world of empirical research.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
Introduction
The field of academic research often uncovers unexpected connections, akin to stumbling upon a quirky friendship between a scientist and a stand-up comedian. One such peculiar connection that has piqued our interest is the intertwined relationship between the political landscape in Nebraska and the consumption of kerosene in Belize. The juxtaposition of these seemingly unrelated variables may initially elicit as much surprise as a physics professor moonlighting as a prankster. However, through diligent data collection and meticulous statistical analysis, we have unearthed an association that is as enigmatic as a cryptic crossword puzzle.
The correlation between Democratic votes for Senators in Nebraska and kerosene usage in Belize at first glance appears as unlikely as a chemist seeking solace in the nuances of Shakespearean sonnets. Yet, our study relies on robust data, drawing from esteemed repositories such as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, to disentangle this intriguing web. With a correlation coefficient of 0.8378587 and p < 0.01, our findings unveil a statistically significant relationship spanning over four decades, reminiscent of a groundbreaking discovery in a laboratory.
While some may quirk an eyebrow at this eccentric connection, our research aspires to shed light on the unconventional interplay between seemingly disparate global trends. This study does not simply aim to add a dash of whimsy to the often austere world of empirical research, but also to reveal the unexpected beauty in the seemingly mundane. Just as a biologist may revel in the kaleidoscopic diversity of a coral reef, we relish in uncovering the idiosyncratic dynamics underlying political and energy landscapes. In unraveling this curious correlation, we invite our readers to join us on a whimsical journey through the labyrinthine world of statistical serendipity.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

METHODOLOGY

Data Collection
The first stage in our research journey involved wrangling data from various sources, reminiscent of a spirited treasure hunt through the digital expanse. We meticulously combed through the archives of the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, sifting through electronic haystacks in pursuit of statistical needles. Our data, spanning from 1980 to 2020, was gathered with the diligence of a fervent botanist cataloging the flora of a tropical rainforest.

Processing and Cleaning
Once our treasure trove of data was amassed, we embarked on the thorny path of data processing and cleaning. Like intrepid explorers sifting through the underbrush in search of elusive specimens, we meticulously scrutinized and purified the datasets, removing outliers and discrepancies. Our quest for pristine data resembled that of a chef meticulously filleting a fish—each slice and dice intended to refine and enhance the quality of our findings.

Variable Selection
With our datasets polished to a gleaming luster, we turned our attention to the delicate art of variable selection. Like a master alchemist carefully balancing the components of an elixir, we delicately curated the variables that would form the bedrock of our analysis. The selection process, akin to assembling the components of a jigsaw puzzle, entailed juxtaposing the variables with an eye for patterns and relationships, all while navigating the labyrinthine corridors of statistical significance.

Statistical Analysis
Our methodology then transitioned into the domain of statistical analysis, where we employed an array of analytical tools with the finesse of a virtuoso musician wielding an orchestra of instruments. With the data poised before us like a canvas awaiting the stroke of a brush, we applied correlation analyses, regression models, and time series analyses to unearth the intricate interplay between Democratic votes for Senators in Nebraska and kerosene usage in Belize. Our statistical foray, akin to a daring expedition, navigated the treacherous terrain of inferential statistics with a blend of precision and audacity.

Ethical Considerations
As custodians of empirical truth, we remained steadfast in upholding the ethical standards of scientific inquiry. Our research was conducted with the utmost integrity, ensuring transparency, confidentiality, and respect for the sanctity of data. Just as a chemist reveres the purity of reagents, we upheld the integrity of our methodology with unwavering commitment.

Limitations
In the spirit of scholarly candor, we acknowledge the limitations inherent in our methodology. The complexities of human behavior, political dynamics, and energy consumption are as enigmatic as a Möbius strip, and despite our endeavors, certain nuances may elude quantification. Furthermore, our data sources, while reputable, are not immune to the imperfections of human endeavor, echoing the timeless adage that even the best-laid plans of researchers and statisticians may encounter the occasional hiccup.

In summary, our methodology was a tapestry woven with the threads of dedication, whimsy, and scholarly rigor. As we navigated the labyrinthine pathway of data collection, cleaning, analysis, and ethical considerations, our endeavor echoed the spirit of scientific inquiry—a pursuit emboldened by our quest for knowledge, enriched by the quirks of empirical discovery, and seasoned with a dash of scholarly humor.


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

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Democrat votes for Senators in Nebraska and Kerosene used in Belize. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and Energy Information Administration .

For the time period 1980 to 2020, you found a correlation 0.8378587, r-squared of 0.7020072, 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]]
"From Cornfields to Kerosene: Uncovering the Quirky Connection Between Nebraska Senatorial Democratic Votes and Belizean Kerosene Usage"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve deep into the unexpected correlation between Democratic votes for Senators in Nebraska and kerosene usage in Belize. Through rigorous analysis of data collected from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, we uncover a rather intriguing relationship between these seemingly disparate variables. Our findings reveal a correlation coefficient of 0.8378587 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 1980 to 2020, indicating a strong statistical association. While the link between the two may seem far-fetched at first, our research sheds light on this quirky connection, highlighting the quirky nuances of political and energy dynamics. This study not only provides an insightful perspective on the intricate interplay of global trends but also adds a whimsical twist to the often austere world of empirical research.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
Introduction
The field of academic research often uncovers unexpected connections, akin to stumbling upon a quirky friendship between a scientist and a stand-up comedian. One such peculiar connection that has piqued our interest is the intertwined relationship between the political landscape in Nebraska and the consumption of kerosene in Belize. The juxtaposition of these seemingly unrelated variables may initially elicit as much surprise as a physics professor moonlighting as a prankster. However, through diligent data collection and meticulous statistical analysis, we have unearthed an association that is as enigmatic as a cryptic crossword puzzle.
The correlation between Democratic votes for Senators in Nebraska and kerosene usage in Belize at first glance appears as unlikely as a chemist seeking solace in the nuances of Shakespearean sonnets. Yet, our study relies on robust data, drawing from esteemed repositories such as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, to disentangle this intriguing web. With a correlation coefficient of 0.8378587 and p < 0.01, our findings unveil a statistically significant relationship spanning over four decades, reminiscent of a groundbreaking discovery in a laboratory.
While some may quirk an eyebrow at this eccentric connection, our research aspires to shed light on the unconventional interplay between seemingly disparate global trends. This study does not simply aim to add a dash of whimsy to the often austere world of empirical research, but also to reveal the unexpected beauty in the seemingly mundane. Just as a biologist may revel in the kaleidoscopic diversity of a coral reef, we relish in uncovering the idiosyncratic dynamics underlying political and energy landscapes. In unraveling this curious correlation, we invite our readers to join us on a whimsical journey through the labyrinthine world of statistical serendipity.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The results of our analysis revealed a striking correlation between Democratic votes for Senators in Nebraska and kerosene usage in Belize over the period from 1980 to 2020. The correlation coefficient of 0.8378587 indicates a strong relationship, akin to the bond between a researcher and a reliable cup of coffee.

Our findings also unveiled an r-squared value of 0.7020072, signifying that approximately 70.2% of the variation in Belizean kerosene usage can be explained by the variation in Democratic votes for Nebraska Senators. This degree of predictability is as remarkable as a statistically significant punchline in a data-driven stand-up routine.

Furthermore, with a p-value of less than 0.01, our results attest to a statistically significant relationship, demonstrating that this correlation is as real as an experimental outcome in a meticulously controlled laboratory setting.

To visually illustrate this unexpected link, we present Figure 1, a scatterplot that portrays the strong and quirky correlation between these seemingly incongruous variables. The figure serves as a testament to the whimsical nature of statistical serendipity and the delightfully unpredictable patterns that enliven the scientific landscape.

These results not only deepen our understanding of the peculiar interplay between political dynamics in the heartland of America and energy consumption in the tropical climes of Belize but also add a playful dimension to the often sober world of empirical inquiry. Just as a chemist may appreciate the unique waltz of chemical reactions, we revel in the captivating dance of statistical associations that transcends traditional boundaries. Through this research, we aim to demonstrate that even the most unexpected connections can reveal captivating insights and infuse the scientific discourse with a touch of lighthearted allure.


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

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Democrat votes for Senators in Nebraska and Kerosene used in Belize. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Limit your response to 500 tokens.

Here are the title, abstract, literature review, and results sections. Please harken back to 1-2 of the goofy items in the literature review, but pretend to take them completely seriously. Discuss how your results supported the prior research.

Do not write a conclusion. I will add a conclusion after this.

[[TITLE]]
"From Cornfields to Kerosene: Uncovering the Quirky Connection Between Nebraska Senatorial Democratic Votes and Belizean Kerosene Usage"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve deep into the unexpected correlation between Democratic votes for Senators in Nebraska and kerosene usage in Belize. Through rigorous analysis of data collected from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, we uncover a rather intriguing relationship between these seemingly disparate variables. Our findings reveal a correlation coefficient of 0.8378587 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 1980 to 2020, indicating a strong statistical association. While the link between the two may seem far-fetched at first, our research sheds light on this quirky connection, highlighting the quirky nuances of political and energy dynamics. This study not only provides an insightful perspective on the intricate interplay of global trends but also adds a whimsical twist to the often austere world of empirical research.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The scholarly exploration of seemingly incongruent phenomena, like the correlation between Democratic votes for Senators in Nebraska and kerosene usage in Belize, has spurred a multitude of studies that delve into unexpected interconnectedness. Smith et al. (2015) investigated the political climate in agricultural states and its implication on global energy trends. The authors find that, contrary to popular belief, the fervent debates over corn subsidies in Nebraska may have a ripple effect on the consumption patterns of kerosene in Central American countries.
Doe (2017) elaborated on the concept of transnational political influences on energy consumption, presenting a detailed analysis of cross-border dynamics. Their research illuminates the domino effect of political movements on the utilization of non-renewable energy sources, possibly evoking visual imagery reminiscent of a game of geopolitical chess, with each move shaping the energy landscape in unforeseen ways.
Jones (2019) further extended this discussion by examining the historical roots of political affiliations and their impact on energy reliance in regions outside the United States. Their work sparks thought-provoking questions about the global implications of local voting preferences, akin to uncovering the unexpected plot twists in a complex political thriller, leaving readers intrigued by the web of connections untangled.
Moving beyond the conventional academic discourse, non-fiction literature has also offered insightful perspectives on the interplay of political dynamics and energy usage. In "Energy Politics and Rural America" by Green (2018), the author ventures into the intricacies of rural politics and its profound implications on the broader energy landscape. Through compelling narratives and data-driven analysis, the book invites readers to contemplate the interwoven tapestry of political decisions and their resonance on energy consumption, much like an enthralling mystery novel that unlocks hidden truths and unexpected parallels.
In a similar vein, the fictional realm has envisioned alternative realities where quirky connections between politics and energy sources unfold in whimsical narratives. "The Senatorial Sorcery: A Tale of Intrigue and Illumination" by Mystique (2020) offers a fantastical portrayal of political intrigue interwoven with mystical energy sources, akin to an enchanting fable that beckons readers into a world where the lines between reality and imagination blur.
Not to be outdone, board games like "Energy Empires: The End of the Triassic" have also provided a playful lens through which to explore the intertwined nature of political decision-making and energy consumption. In this strategy game, players navigate the complexities of political landscapes and resource management, mirroring the intricate dance between policy choices and their far-reaching effects on energy dynamics.
As the literature reflects, the exploration of the correlation between Democratic votes for Senators in Nebraska and kerosene usage in Belize is not merely an exercise in statistical analysis, but a journey that unravels unexpected connections, inviting both thoughtful contemplation and a playful embrace of the uncanny.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our analysis revealed a striking correlation between Democratic votes for Senators in Nebraska and kerosene usage in Belize over the period from 1980 to 2020. The correlation coefficient of 0.8378587 indicates a strong relationship, akin to the bond between a researcher and a reliable cup of coffee.
Our findings also unveiled an r-squared value of 0.7020072, signifying that approximately 70.2% of the variation in Belizean kerosene usage can be explained by the variation in Democratic votes for Nebraska Senators. This degree of predictability is as remarkable as a statistically significant punchline in a data-driven stand-up routine.
Furthermore, with a p-value of less than 0.01, our results attest to a statistically significant relationship, demonstrating that this correlation is as real as an experimental outcome in a meticulously controlled laboratory setting.
To visually illustrate this unexpected link, we present Figure 1, a scatterplot that portrays the strong and quirky correlation between these seemingly incongruous variables. The figure serves as a testament to the whimsical nature of statistical serendipity and the delightfully unpredictable patterns that enliven the scientific landscape.
These results not only deepen our understanding of the peculiar interplay between political dynamics in the heartland of America and energy consumption in the tropical climes of Belize but also add a playful dimension to the often sober world of empirical inquiry. Just as a chemist may appreciate the unique waltz of chemical reactions, we revel in the captivating dance of statistical associations that transcends traditional boundaries. Through this research, we aim to demonstrate that even the most unexpected connections can reveal captivating insights and infuse the scientific discourse with a touch of lighthearted allure.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The striking correlation uncovered in this study between Democratic votes for Senators in Nebraska and kerosene usage in Belize is, without a doubt, as unexpected as finding a pineapple on a pizza – controversial, but undeniably intriguing. Building on the existing body of literature, our findings echo the earlier works of Smith et al. (2015) and Doe (2017), who hinted at the covert influence of political machinations on global energy patterns. The uncanny bond we observed between Nebraska's voting preferences and Belizean kerosene consumption can be likened to an unexpected plot twist in a political thriller – a surprising revelation that adds a touch of whimsy to the traditionally staid world of empirical research.

Much like the unpredictable dynamics of a high-stakes poker game, our data revealed a correlation coefficient that undeniably captivates the imagination, boasting a level of statistical significance as conspicuous as a zebra in a snowstorm. This robust correlation, aptly symbolized by the close-knit relationship between a politician and their trusty podium, reinforces the notion that seemingly incongruous variables can, in fact, share an uncanny bond worthy of further investigation.

Our research has shed light on the vivid tapestry of global interconnectivity, much like a thriving ecosystem where unexpected symbiotic relationships thrive. The r-squared value revealed an impressive degree of predictability, akin to the uncanny ability of a weather forecaster to accurately predict a sudden downpour amidst clear skies. In addition, the p-value, as elusive as a rare Pokémon, firmly establishes the credibility of this offbeat correlation, solidifying its status as a legitimate curiosity amidst the vast expanse of empirical inquiry.

In conclusion, this unanticipated correlation between Democratic votes for Nebraska Senators and kerosene usage in Belize transcends the conventional boundaries of statistical analysis, infusing the scientific discourse with a touch of whimsical allure, much like a spontaneous burst of confetti at a solemn gathering. Our findings not only underscore the peculiar interconnectedness of political decision-making and energy dynamics but also beckon researchers to embrace the whimsical serendipity that enlivens the pursuit of knowledge. As the scientific community continues to delve into uncharted territories, let us approach our investigations with a sense of open-minded curiosity, for it is in the unexpected connections that we may unravel the most enchanting mysteries of our world.


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

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Democrat votes for Senators in Nebraska and Kerosene used in Belize. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Limit your response to 300 tokens. At the very end, assert that no more research is needed in this area.

Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
"From Cornfields to Kerosene: Uncovering the Quirky Connection Between Nebraska Senatorial Democratic Votes and Belizean Kerosene Usage"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve deep into the unexpected correlation between Democratic votes for Senators in Nebraska and kerosene usage in Belize. Through rigorous analysis of data collected from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, we uncover a rather intriguing relationship between these seemingly disparate variables. Our findings reveal a correlation coefficient of 0.8378587 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 1980 to 2020, indicating a strong statistical association. While the link between the two may seem far-fetched at first, our research sheds light on this quirky connection, highlighting the quirky nuances of political and energy dynamics. This study not only provides an insightful perspective on the intricate interplay of global trends but also adds a whimsical twist to the often austere world of empirical research.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
Introduction
The field of academic research often uncovers unexpected connections, akin to stumbling upon a quirky friendship between a scientist and a stand-up comedian. One such peculiar connection that has piqued our interest is the intertwined relationship between the political landscape in Nebraska and the consumption of kerosene in Belize. The juxtaposition of these seemingly unrelated variables may initially elicit as much surprise as a physics professor moonlighting as a prankster. However, through diligent data collection and meticulous statistical analysis, we have unearthed an association that is as enigmatic as a cryptic crossword puzzle.
The correlation between Democratic votes for Senators in Nebraska and kerosene usage in Belize at first glance appears as unlikely as a chemist seeking solace in the nuances of Shakespearean sonnets. Yet, our study relies on robust data, drawing from esteemed repositories such as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, to disentangle this intriguing web. With a correlation coefficient of 0.8378587 and p < 0.01, our findings unveil a statistically significant relationship spanning over four decades, reminiscent of a groundbreaking discovery in a laboratory.
While some may quirk an eyebrow at this eccentric connection, our research aspires to shed light on the unconventional interplay between seemingly disparate global trends. This study does not simply aim to add a dash of whimsy to the often austere world of empirical research, but also to reveal the unexpected beauty in the seemingly mundane. Just as a biologist may revel in the kaleidoscopic diversity of a coral reef, we relish in uncovering the idiosyncratic dynamics underlying political and energy landscapes. In unraveling this curious correlation, we invite our readers to join us on a whimsical journey through the labyrinthine world of statistical serendipity.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our analysis revealed a striking correlation between Democratic votes for Senators in Nebraska and kerosene usage in Belize over the period from 1980 to 2020. The correlation coefficient of 0.8378587 indicates a strong relationship, akin to the bond between a researcher and a reliable cup of coffee.
Our findings also unveiled an r-squared value of 0.7020072, signifying that approximately 70.2% of the variation in Belizean kerosene usage can be explained by the variation in Democratic votes for Nebraska Senators. This degree of predictability is as remarkable as a statistically significant punchline in a data-driven stand-up routine.
Furthermore, with a p-value of less than 0.01, our results attest to a statistically significant relationship, demonstrating that this correlation is as real as an experimental outcome in a meticulously controlled laboratory setting.
To visually illustrate this unexpected link, we present Figure 1, a scatterplot that portrays the strong and quirky correlation between these seemingly incongruous variables. The figure serves as a testament to the whimsical nature of statistical serendipity and the delightfully unpredictable patterns that enliven the scientific landscape.
These results not only deepen our understanding of the peculiar interplay between political dynamics in the heartland of America and energy consumption in the tropical climes of Belize but also add a playful dimension to the often sober world of empirical inquiry. Just as a chemist may appreciate the unique waltz of chemical reactions, we revel in the captivating dance of statistical associations that transcends traditional boundaries. Through this research, we aim to demonstrate that even the most unexpected connections can reveal captivating insights and infuse the scientific discourse with a touch of lighthearted allure.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our research has drawn attention to the delightfully curious relationship between Democratic votes for Senators in Nebraska and kerosene usage in Belize. While this association may seem as improbable as a physicist exploring the nuances of interpretive dance, the robust statistical evidence we have uncovered highlights the quirky interplay of seemingly unrelated variables.

The significant correlation coefficient of 0.8378587 and p < 0.01 not only reaffirm the legitimacy of this connection but also serve as a reminder that statistical serendipity can be as captivating as a magician pulling a rabbit out of a hat. The r-squared value of 0.7020072 further emphasizes the predictability of this whimsical relationship, akin to the reliability of the periodic table in elucidating chemical phenomena.

Through Figure 1, we visually encapsulate the dance of statistical serendipity between these unusual bedfellows, akin to a charming waltz between a physicist and a philosopher. Our findings not only contribute to our understanding of global trends but also inject a playful dimension into the empirical landscape, much like a comedian infusing a research conference with lighthearted banter.

In light of these compelling results, we assert that no further research is needed in this area. The quirky camaraderie between Nebraska Senatorial Democratic votes and Belizean kerosene usage has been sufficiently illuminated, leaving us with a newfound appreciation for the whimsical marvels of statistical inquiry. As Einstein once said, "The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious connection between two seemingly disparate variables."

No more research needed here - we've cracked this joke, er, code.


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 From Cornfields to Kerosene: Uncovering the Quirky Connection Between Nebraska Senatorial Democratic Votes and Belizean Kerosene Usage. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Geopolitical Oddities


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 From Cornfields to Kerosene: Uncovering the Quirky Connection Between Nebraska Senatorial Democratic Votes and Belizean Kerosene Usage. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for Transcontinental Political and Energy Research


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide potential search keywords separated by commas. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide potential search keywords for a paper titled From Cornfields to Kerosene: Uncovering the Quirky Connection Between Nebraska Senatorial Democratic Votes and Belizean Kerosene Usage with an abstract of In this study, we delve deep into the unexpected correlation between Democratic votes for Senators in Nebraska and kerosene usage in Belize. Through rigorous analysis of data collected from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, we uncover a rather intriguing relationship between these seemingly disparate variables. Our findings reveal a correlation coefficient of 0.8378587 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 1980 to 2020, indicating a strong statistical association. While the link between the two may seem far-fetched at first, our research sheds light on this quirky connection, highlighting the quirky nuances of political and energy dynamics. This study not only provides an insightful perspective on the intricate interplay of global trends but also adds a whimsical twist to the often austere world of empirical research.

ChatGPT:

Nebraska Democratic votes, Belize kerosene usage, correlation analysis, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, Energy Information Administration, correlation coefficient, statistical association, political dynamics, energy dynamics, global trends, empirical research

*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 Democratic Senators in Nebraska
Detailed data title: Total number of votes cast for Federal Democrat Senate candidates in Nebraska
Source: MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse
See what else correlates with Votes for Democratic Senators in Nebraska

Kerosene used in Belize
Detailed data title: Volume of kerosene used consumed in Belize in millions of barrels per day
Source: Energy Information Administration
See what else correlates with Kerosene used in Belize

Correlation r = 0.8378587 (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 = 0.7020072 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 70.2% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Kerosene used in Belize) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Votes for Democratic Senators in Nebraska) over the 8 years from 1980 through 2020.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.0094. 0.0094027629197312360000000000
The p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme. More specifically the p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme if we had only tested one pair of variables one time.

But I am a p-villain. I absolutely did not test only one pair of variables one time. I correlated hundreds of millions of pairs of variables. I threw boatloads of data into an industrial-sized blender to find this correlation.

Who is going to stop me? p-value reporting doesn't require me to report how many calculations I had to go through in order to find a low p-value!
On average, you will find a correaltion as strong as 0.84 in 0.94% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 106 random variables Which I absolutely did.
with the same 7 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 7 because we have two variables measured over a period of 8 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.

[ 0.33, 0.97 ] 95% correlation confidence interval (using the Fisher z-transformation)
The confidence interval is an estimate the range of the value of the correlation coefficient, using the correlation itself as an input. The values are meant to be the low and high end of the correlation coefficient with 95% confidence.

This one is a bit more complciated than the other calculations, but I include it because many people have been pushing for confidence intervals instead of p-value calculations (for example: NEJM. However, if you are dredging data, you can reliably find yourself in the 5%. That's my goal!


All values for the years included above: If I were being very sneaky, I could trim years from the beginning or end of the datasets to increase the correlation on some pairs of variables. I don't do that because there are already plenty of correlations in my database without monkeying with the years.

Still, sometimes one of the variables has more years of data available than the other. This page only shows the overlapping years. To see all the years, click on "See what else correlates with..." link above.
19821984198819901994201420182020
Votes for Democratic Senators in Nebraska (Total votes)363350332217378717349779317297170127269917227191
Kerosene used in Belize (Million Barrels/Day)0.2991530.3205210.30.40.40.003046890.003060670.0026106




Why this works

  1. Data dredging: I have 25,237 variables in my database. I compare all these variables against each other to find ones that randomly match up. That's 636,906,169 correlation calculations! This is called “data dredging.” Instead of starting with a hypothesis and testing it, I instead abused the data to see what correlations shake out. It’s a dangerous way to go about analysis, because any sufficiently large dataset will yield strong correlations completely at random.
  2. Lack of causal connection: There is probably Because these pages are automatically generated, it's possible that the two variables you are viewing are in fact causually related. I take steps to prevent the obvious ones from showing on the site (I don't let data about the weather in one city correlate with the weather in a neighboring city, for example), but sometimes they still pop up. If they are related, cool! You found a loophole.
    no direct connection between these variables, despite what the AI says above. This is exacerbated by the fact that I used "Years" as the base variable. Lots of things happen in a year that are not related to each other! Most studies would use something like "one person" in stead of "one year" to be the "thing" studied.
  3. Observations not independent: For many variables, sequential years are not independent of each other. If a population of people is continuously doing something every day, there is no reason to think they would suddenly change how they are doing that thing on January 1. A simple Personally I don't find any p-value calculation to be 'simple,' but you know what I mean.
    p-value calculation does not take this into account, so mathematically it appears less probable than it really is.
  4. 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.
  5. Y-axis doesn't start at zero: I truncated the Y-axes of the graph above. I also used a line graph, which makes the visual connection stand out more than it deserves. Nothing against line graphs. They are great at telling a story when you have linear data! But visually it is deceptive because the only data is at the points on the graph, not the lines on the graph. In between each point, the data could have been doing anything. Like going for a random walk by itself!
    Mathematically what I showed is true, but it is intentionally misleading. Below is the same chart but with both Y-axes starting at zero.




Try it yourself

You can calculate the values on this page on your own! Try running the Python code to see the calculation results. Step 1: Download and install Python on your computer.

Step 2: Open a plaintext editor like Notepad and paste the code below into it.

Step 3: Save the file as "calculate_correlation.py" in a place you will remember, like your desktop. Copy the file location to your clipboard. On Windows, you can right-click the file and click "Properties," and then copy what comes after "Location:" As an example, on my computer the location is "C:\Users\tyler\Desktop"

Step 4: Open a command line window. For example, by pressing start and typing "cmd" and them pressing enter.

Step 5: Install the required modules by typing "pip install numpy", then pressing enter, then typing "pip install scipy", then pressing enter.

Step 6: Navigate to the location where you saved the Python file by using the "cd" command. For example, I would type "cd C:\Users\tyler\Desktop" and push enter.

Step 7: Run the Python script by typing "python calculate_correlation.py"

If you run into any issues, I suggest asking ChatGPT to walk you through installing Python and running the code below on your system. Try this question:

"Walk me through installing Python on my computer to run a script that uses scipy and numpy. Go step-by-step and ask me to confirm before moving on. Start by asking me questions about my operating system so that you know how to proceed. Assume I want the simplest installation with the latest version of Python and that I do not currently have any of the necessary elements installed. Remember to only give me one step per response and confirm I have done it before proceeding."


# These modules make it easier to perform the calculation
import numpy as np
from scipy import stats

# We'll define a function that we can call to return the correlation calculations
def calculate_correlation(array1, array2):

    # Calculate Pearson correlation coefficient and p-value
    correlation, p_value = stats.pearsonr(array1, array2)

    # Calculate R-squared as the square of the correlation coefficient
    r_squared = correlation**2

    return correlation, r_squared, p_value

# These are the arrays for the variables shown on this page, but you can modify them to be any two sets of numbers
array_1 = np.array([363350,332217,378717,349779,317297,170127,269917,227191,])
array_2 = np.array([0.299153,0.320521,0.3,0.4,0.4,0.00304689,0.00306067,0.0026106,])
array_1_name = "Votes for Democratic Senators in Nebraska"
array_2_name = "Kerosene used in Belize"

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

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



Reuseable content

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

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

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

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

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

Download images for these variables:


View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Hats off to you for rating!


Correlation ID: 5709 · Black Variable ID: 26272 · Red Variable ID: 24197
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0