about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #1,132 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Academy Award Best Supporting Actor Winner's Age and the second variable is xkcd comics published about wonder.  The chart goes from 2007 to 2022, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As Best Supporting Actor winners got younger, they were more likely to be fans of loud music. This led to a surge in air guitar jam sessions, creating a nationwide shortage of imaginary guitar strings. Without wonder-filled tunes to inspire him, the xkcd artist found himself in a creativity slump.

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Certainly! Here’s an improved image generation prompt for DALL·E-3: Generate an image styled as a Polaroid photo that captures a group of young actors standing on a red carpet. The actors are seen jubilantly posing with their shiny Oscars. In the background, a bulletin board is displayed, showcasing colorful xkcd comics that depict different wonders of the world. As the actors celebrate their success, the number of new xkcd comics about wonder gradually declines, suggesting a shift in creative focus from wonder to other subjects in response to the youthful exuberance of the award winners. It is essential to keep the visual depiction simple and not include any words or speech bubbles. 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 situation described. You respond only with the scene descriptions provided and say nothing else.
User prompt: Here is a situation: "New research suggests that as the age of Academy Award Best Supporting Actor winners decreases, so does the number of xkcd comics published about wonder. Scientists believe that as the youthful exuberance of the winners increases, it inspires Randall Munroe, the creator of xkcd, to channel his wonder and creativity in other directions. This groundbreaking study highlights the surprising impact that Hollywood's finest can have on the world of webcomics.". Given that situation, which of the following image descriptions seems most appropriate? Pick the one that seems to be related to one of the variables at hand and the tone of the explanation. Please respond with only one of the following potential descriptions: Cute 2D animation 3D Pixar Style Glitch art Oragami 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 and the explanation described. Do not reference graphs or charts; describe physical objects.
User prompt: Please describe a visual scene that depicts the following situation. Keep the description simple. "New research suggests that as the age of Academy Award Best Supporting Actor winners decreases, so does the number of xkcd comics published about wonder. Scientists believe that as the youthful exuberance of the winners increases, it inspires Randall Munroe, the creator of xkcd, to channel his wonder and creativity in other directions. This groundbreaking study highlights the surprising impact that Hollywood's finest can have on the world of webcomics."
ChatGPT: Imagine a group of young actors posing with their shiny Oscars on a red carpet. In the background, a bulletin board displays colorful xkcd comics about different wonders of the world. As the actors celebrate their success, the number of new xkcd comics about wonder gradually declines, suggesting a shift in creative focus from wonder to other subjects in response to the youthful exuberance of the award winners.

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: Imagine a group of young actors posing with their shiny Oscars on a red carpet. In the background, a bulletin board displays colorful xkcd comics about different wonders of the world. As the actors celebrate their success, the number of new xkcd comics about wonder gradually declines, suggesting a shift in creative focus from wonder to other subjects in response to the youthful exuberance of the award winners. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Certainly! Here’s an improved image generation prompt for DALL·E-3: Generate an image styled as a Polaroid photo that captures a group of young actors standing on a red carpet. The actors are seen jubilantly posing with their shiny Oscars. In the background, a bulletin board is displayed, showcasing colorful xkcd comics that depict different wonders of the world. As the actors celebrate their success, the number of new xkcd comics about wonder gradually declines, suggesting a shift in creative focus from wonder to other subjects in response to the youthful exuberance of the award winners. It is essential to keep the visual depiction simple and not include any words or speech bubbles.

*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 Academy Award Best Supporting Actor Winner's Age caused xkcd comics published about wonder to decrease.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.05)
The Age of Support: A Supporting Player in xkcd Wonder

The Journal of Whimsical Research and Quirky Discoveries

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 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 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 Academy Award Best Supporting Actor Winner's Age and xkcd comics published about wonder. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

Make the title a clever pun.

Your research team used data from Wikipedia and AI analysis of xkcd comics to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.5007845 and p < 0.05 for 2007 to 2022.

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

[[TITLE]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit

[[ABSTRACT]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit



ChatGPT:
[[TITLE]]
The Age of Support: A Supporting Player in xkcd Wonder

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the unexpected and delightful connection between the age of Academy Award Best Supporting Actor winners and the portrayal of wonder in xkcd comics. Utilizing data from Wikipedia and implementing cutting-edge AI analysis of xkcd comics, this study investigates the correlation between these seemingly disparate variables. With a correlation coefficient of 0.5007845 and p < 0.05 for the years 2007 to 2022, the statistical analysis reveals a surprising relationship between the two phenomena.

An analysis of the age of Best Supporting Actor winners alongside the depiction of wonder in xkcd comics provides provocative insights into the intersection of film and comedic art. The findings suggest a tantalizing link between the maturity and life experience of these actors and the creative portrayal of wonder in the xkcd comic series. The results also invite reflection on the transformative impact of age and wisdom on the portrayal of wonder in popular culture, prompting contemplation on the aging process from both a humorous and profound perspective.

The research team's in-depth analysis brings an engaging and unexpected dimension to the realms of film, comedy, and statistical analysis. These findings add significant depth to the understanding of popular culture and its subtle connections to human experience, provoking both scholarly consideration and a newfound appreciation for the witty intricacies of life's anomalies.

Why don't we ever tell secrets on a farm? Because the potatoes have eyes and the corn has ears!


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 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 Academy Award Best Supporting Actor Winner's Age and xkcd comics published about wonder. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
The Age of Support: A Supporting Player in xkcd Wonder

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the unexpected and delightful connection between the age of Academy Award Best Supporting Actor winners and the portrayal of wonder in xkcd comics. Utilizing data from Wikipedia and implementing cutting-edge AI analysis of xkcd comics, this study investigates the correlation between these seemingly disparate variables. With a correlation coefficient of 0.5007845 and p < 0.05 for the years 2007 to 2022, the statistical analysis reveals a surprising relationship between the two phenomena.

An analysis of the age of Best Supporting Actor winners alongside the depiction of wonder in xkcd comics provides provocative insights into the intersection of film and comedic art. The findings suggest a tantalizing link between the maturity and life experience of these actors and the creative portrayal of wonder in the xkcd comic series. The results also invite reflection on the transformative impact of age and wisdom on the portrayal of wonder in popular culture, prompting contemplation on the aging process from both a humorous and profound perspective.

The research team's in-depth analysis brings an engaging and unexpected dimension to the realms of film, comedy, and statistical analysis. These findings add significant depth to the understanding of popular culture and its subtle connections to human experience, provoking both scholarly consideration and a newfound appreciation for the witty intricacies of life's anomalies.

Why don't we ever tell secrets on a farm? Because the potatoes have eyes and the corn has ears!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

The juxtaposition of age and wonder may seem to be a topic more suited to a whimsical fairy tale than a scholarly pursuit. However, the correlation between the age of Academy Award Best Supporting Actor winners and the portrayal of wonder in xkcd comics has proven to be a thought-provoking and, dare I say, delightful area of investigation. As we embark on this academic journey, let us remember the wise words of Albert Einstein, who said, "I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious." And curious we shall remain as we unravel this peculiar connection.

The allure of the Academy Awards, with its glittering red carpet and tearful acceptance speeches, often overshadows the more nuanced aspects of the winners' demographics, including their age at the time of receiving the coveted accolade. Much like a fine wine, the age of Best Supporting Actor winners may indeed hold the key to unlocking the mysteries of comedic wonder. It is as if statistical analysis has decided to play a supporting role in the theater of life, adding its own twist to the unfolding drama.

In a research endeavour such as this, it is essential to approach the data with a critical eye and a keen understanding of the variables involved. The statistics gathered from Wikipedia provide a rich harvest of information regarding the ages of Best Supporting Actor winners, laying the groundwork for a robust analysis. Meanwhile, the world of xkcd comics, with its brilliant and often zany take on science, mathematics, and daily life, offers a fertile ground for the exploration of wonder in various comedic scenarios. By bringing these disparate worlds together, we aim to shed light on the unexpected connections that underpin artistic expression and human experience.

Why did the statistician end up winning an award? Because he had too much mean and not enough standard deviation!


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 Academy Award Best Supporting Actor Winner's Age and xkcd comics published about wonder. 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 name some cartoons and childrens' shows that you watched that are related to the topic.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
The Age of Support: A Supporting Player in xkcd Wonder

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the unexpected and delightful connection between the age of Academy Award Best Supporting Actor winners and the portrayal of wonder in xkcd comics. Utilizing data from Wikipedia and implementing cutting-edge AI analysis of xkcd comics, this study investigates the correlation between these seemingly disparate variables. With a correlation coefficient of 0.5007845 and p < 0.05 for the years 2007 to 2022, the statistical analysis reveals a surprising relationship between the two phenomena.

An analysis of the age of Best Supporting Actor winners alongside the depiction of wonder in xkcd comics provides provocative insights into the intersection of film and comedic art. The findings suggest a tantalizing link between the maturity and life experience of these actors and the creative portrayal of wonder in the xkcd comic series. The results also invite reflection on the transformative impact of age and wisdom on the portrayal of wonder in popular culture, prompting contemplation on the aging process from both a humorous and profound perspective.

The research team's in-depth analysis brings an engaging and unexpected dimension to the realms of film, comedy, and statistical analysis. These findings add significant depth to the understanding of popular culture and its subtle connections to human experience, provoking both scholarly consideration and a newfound appreciation for the witty intricacies of life's anomalies.

Why don't we ever tell secrets on a farm? Because the potatoes have eyes and the corn has ears!

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The juxtaposition of age and wonder may seem to be a topic more suited to a whimsical fairy tale than a scholarly pursuit. However, the correlation between the age of Academy Award Best Supporting Actor winners and the portrayal of wonder in xkcd comics has proven to be a thought-provoking and, dare I say, delightful area of investigation. As we embark on this academic journey, let us remember the wise words of Albert Einstein, who said, "I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious." And curious we shall remain as we unravel this peculiar connection.
The allure of the Academy Awards, with its glittering red carpet and tearful acceptance speeches, often overshadows the more nuanced aspects of the winners' demographics, including their age at the time of receiving the coveted accolade. Much like a fine wine, the age of Best Supporting Actor winners may indeed hold the key to unlocking the mysteries of comedic wonder. It is as if statistical analysis has decided to play a supporting role in the theater of life, adding its own twist to the unfolding drama.
In a research endeavour such as this, it is essential to approach the data with a critical eye and a keen understanding of the variables involved. The statistics gathered from Wikipedia provide a rich harvest of information regarding the ages of Best Supporting Actor winners, laying the groundwork for a robust analysis. Meanwhile, the world of xkcd comics, with its brilliant and often zany take on science, mathematics, and daily life, offers a fertile ground for the exploration of wonder in various comedic scenarios. By bringing these disparate worlds together, we aim to shed light on the unexpected connections that underpin artistic expression and human experience.
Why did the statistician end up winning an award? Because he had too much mean and not enough standard deviation!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The connection between the age of Academy Award Best Supporting Actor winners and the portrayal of wonder in xkcd comics has been relatively unexplored in academic literature. However, recent studies by Smith (2015), Doe (2018), and Jones (2020) have paved the way for this unconventional inquiry. Smith (2015) emphasizes the importance of age and life experience in artistic expression, laying the foundation for our examination of age and comedic wonder. Meanwhile, Doe (2018) introduces the concept of statistical correlations in seemingly unrelated cultural phenomena, providing a framework for our statistical analysis. Additionally, Jones (2020) delves into the portrayal of wonder in contemporary comedic art, setting the stage for our exploration of wonder in xkcd comics.

Turning to non-fiction publications, "The Age of Wisdom: Understanding the Influence of Life Experience on Artistic Expression" by Dr. A. Sage offers insights into the role of maturity in creative endeavors, informing our understanding of the potential impact of age on the depiction of wonder in comedic art. Likewise, "Quantifying Quirkiness: Statistical Analysis in Popular Culture" by Prof. C. Levar provides a methodological perspective that informs our statistical approach to examining the connection between the age of Best Supporting Actor winners and wonder in xkcd comics.

In the realm of fiction, works such as "The Wonder Years" by J. Author and "Ageless Wonder: A Tale of Time and Comics" by N. Novelist offer imaginative perspectives on the intersection of age and wonder, inspiring our exploration of the relationship between the age of Best Supporting Actor winners and the portrayal of wonder in xkcd comics. These creative narratives encourage a whimsical outlook on age and wonder, complementing our scholarly investigation with a touch of literary charm.

Furthermore, childhood cartoons and shows such as "SpongeBob SquarePants," "The Magic School Bus," and "Mister Rogers' Neighborhood" have instilled within many of us a deep appreciation for wonder and curiosity from a young age. These cultural touchstones, while not directly related to our topic, have certainly shaped our understanding of wonder and may have subconsciously influenced our approach to this research. As we consider the portrayal of wonder in xkcd comics, these beloved childhood memories add a nostalgic flavor to our academic pursuit, reminding us that humor and wonder are timeless companions in the journey of life.

Why did the comedian go to school? Because he wanted to improve his stand-up act!


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 Academy Award Best Supporting Actor Winner's Age and xkcd comics published about wonder. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Wikipedia and AI analysis of xkcd comics . You used data from 2007 to 2022

Make up the research methods you don't know. Make them a bit goofy and convoluted.

Here is the title, abstract, and introduction of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
The Age of Support: A Supporting Player in xkcd Wonder

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the unexpected and delightful connection between the age of Academy Award Best Supporting Actor winners and the portrayal of wonder in xkcd comics. Utilizing data from Wikipedia and implementing cutting-edge AI analysis of xkcd comics, this study investigates the correlation between these seemingly disparate variables. With a correlation coefficient of 0.5007845 and p < 0.05 for the years 2007 to 2022, the statistical analysis reveals a surprising relationship between the two phenomena.

An analysis of the age of Best Supporting Actor winners alongside the depiction of wonder in xkcd comics provides provocative insights into the intersection of film and comedic art. The findings suggest a tantalizing link between the maturity and life experience of these actors and the creative portrayal of wonder in the xkcd comic series. The results also invite reflection on the transformative impact of age and wisdom on the portrayal of wonder in popular culture, prompting contemplation on the aging process from both a humorous and profound perspective.

The research team's in-depth analysis brings an engaging and unexpected dimension to the realms of film, comedy, and statistical analysis. These findings add significant depth to the understanding of popular culture and its subtle connections to human experience, provoking both scholarly consideration and a newfound appreciation for the witty intricacies of life's anomalies.

Why don't we ever tell secrets on a farm? Because the potatoes have eyes and the corn has ears!

[[INTRODUCTION]]
The juxtaposition of age and wonder may seem to be a topic more suited to a whimsical fairy tale than a scholarly pursuit. However, the correlation between the age of Academy Award Best Supporting Actor winners and the portrayal of wonder in xkcd comics has proven to be a thought-provoking and, dare I say, delightful area of investigation. As we embark on this academic journey, let us remember the wise words of Albert Einstein, who said, "I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious." And curious we shall remain as we unravel this peculiar connection.
The allure of the Academy Awards, with its glittering red carpet and tearful acceptance speeches, often overshadows the more nuanced aspects of the winners' demographics, including their age at the time of receiving the coveted accolade. Much like a fine wine, the age of Best Supporting Actor winners may indeed hold the key to unlocking the mysteries of comedic wonder. It is as if statistical analysis has decided to play a supporting role in the theater of life, adding its own twist to the unfolding drama.
In a research endeavour such as this, it is essential to approach the data with a critical eye and a keen understanding of the variables involved. The statistics gathered from Wikipedia provide a rich harvest of information regarding the ages of Best Supporting Actor winners, laying the groundwork for a robust analysis. Meanwhile, the world of xkcd comics, with its brilliant and often zany take on science, mathematics, and daily life, offers a fertile ground for the exploration of wonder in various comedic scenarios. By bringing these disparate worlds together, we aim to shed light on the unexpected connections that underpin artistic expression and human experience.
Why did the statistician end up winning an award? Because he had too much mean and not enough standard deviation!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To investigate the relationship between the age of Academy Award Best Supporting Actor winners and the depiction of wonder in xkcd comics, our research team employed an interdisciplinary approach that necessitated a delicate balance of creative analysis and methodological rigor. The data collection process involved scouring a plethora of sources, with particular emphasis on harvesting information from the sprawling realms of Wikipedia and employing the latest advancements in artificial intelligence to decipher the nuances of xkcd comics.

The age of Best Supporting Actor winners was extracted from various reliable sources such as Wikipedia, ensuring that no stone was left unturned in our quest for accurate and comprehensive data. This comprehensive and exhaustive data collection played a pivotal role in laying the foundation for our subsequent statistical analyses, allowing us to navigate the terrain of age with finesse and precision.

After meticulously compiling the ages of Best Supporting Actor winners for the years spanning 2007 to 2022, we ventured into the realm of xkcd comics armed with the cutting-edge tool of artificial intelligence. The computational analysis of the xkcd comics was an intricate dance of algorithms and insight, as we sought to quantify and categorize the portrayal of wonder in these humorous and often cryptic visual narratives.

At the heart of our methodological approach lay the utilization of advanced AI algorithms to discern the thematic elements of wonder within the vast expanse of xkcd comics. Through a meticulously designed process of image recognition and semantic analysis, we endeavored to capture the essence of wonder as depicted within the panels of xkcd, teasing out the subtle nuances and humorous musings that permeate these artistic creations.

With this multidimensional dataset in hand, we then proceeded to conduct a robust statistical analysis, crafting an intricate web of inferential and descriptive statistics to unravel the potential correlation between the age of Best Supporting Actor winners and the portrayal of wonder in xkcd comics. This analytical odyssey led us to the shores of correlation coefficients and p-values, where we sought to discern the magnitude and significance of the relationship under scrutiny.

As our statistical algorithms hummed with the melody of data, we approached the task of hypothesis testing with an unwavering commitment to scientific rigor, ensuring that our inferences were firmly grounded in the realm of empirical evidence. Our choice of statistical tests was governed by a keen sense of methodological prudence, and we navigated the labyrinth of significance levels with a steady hand, seeking to glean meaningful insights while safeguarding against the siren song of spurious correlations.

What do you call a statistical pirate? Arrrrr squared!


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 Academy Award Best Supporting Actor Winner's Age and xkcd comics published about wonder. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Wikipedia and AI analysis of xkcd comics .

For the time period 2007 to 2022, you found a correlation 0.5007845, r-squared of 0.2507851, 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]]
The Age of Support: A Supporting Player in xkcd Wonder

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the unexpected and delightful connection between the age of Academy Award Best Supporting Actor winners and the portrayal of wonder in xkcd comics. Utilizing data from Wikipedia and implementing cutting-edge AI analysis of xkcd comics, this study investigates the correlation between these seemingly disparate variables. With a correlation coefficient of 0.5007845 and p < 0.05 for the years 2007 to 2022, the statistical analysis reveals a surprising relationship between the two phenomena.

An analysis of the age of Best Supporting Actor winners alongside the depiction of wonder in xkcd comics provides provocative insights into the intersection of film and comedic art. The findings suggest a tantalizing link between the maturity and life experience of these actors and the creative portrayal of wonder in the xkcd comic series. The results also invite reflection on the transformative impact of age and wisdom on the portrayal of wonder in popular culture, prompting contemplation on the aging process from both a humorous and profound perspective.

The research team's in-depth analysis brings an engaging and unexpected dimension to the realms of film, comedy, and statistical analysis. These findings add significant depth to the understanding of popular culture and its subtle connections to human experience, provoking both scholarly consideration and a newfound appreciation for the witty intricacies of life's anomalies.

Why don't we ever tell secrets on a farm? Because the potatoes have eyes and the corn has ears!

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
The juxtaposition of age and wonder may seem to be a topic more suited to a whimsical fairy tale than a scholarly pursuit. However, the correlation between the age of Academy Award Best Supporting Actor winners and the portrayal of wonder in xkcd comics has proven to be a thought-provoking and, dare I say, delightful area of investigation. As we embark on this academic journey, let us remember the wise words of Albert Einstein, who said, "I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious." And curious we shall remain as we unravel this peculiar connection.
The allure of the Academy Awards, with its glittering red carpet and tearful acceptance speeches, often overshadows the more nuanced aspects of the winners' demographics, including their age at the time of receiving the coveted accolade. Much like a fine wine, the age of Best Supporting Actor winners may indeed hold the key to unlocking the mysteries of comedic wonder. It is as if statistical analysis has decided to play a supporting role in the theater of life, adding its own twist to the unfolding drama.
In a research endeavour such as this, it is essential to approach the data with a critical eye and a keen understanding of the variables involved. The statistics gathered from Wikipedia provide a rich harvest of information regarding the ages of Best Supporting Actor winners, laying the groundwork for a robust analysis. Meanwhile, the world of xkcd comics, with its brilliant and often zany take on science, mathematics, and daily life, offers a fertile ground for the exploration of wonder in various comedic scenarios. By bringing these disparate worlds together, we aim to shed light on the unexpected connections that underpin artistic expression and human experience.
Why did the statistician end up winning an award? Because he had too much mean and not enough standard deviation!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The correlation analysis between the age of Academy Award Best Supporting Actor winners and the portrayal of wonder in xkcd comics yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.5007845. This indicates a moderate positive relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables, providing a statistically significant result with a p-value of less than 0.05. The relationship, while surprising, suggests a compelling connection between the age of these celebrated actors and the comedic exploration of wonder in the xkcd comic series.

In the words of the late Sir Isaac Newton, "If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants." Much like the towering figure of Newton, the influence of age on the portrayal of wonder in comedic art stands as a remarkable testament to the wisdom gained over the years.

The scatterplot (Fig. 1) visually encapsulates this intriguing correlation, as it depicts a clear trend of increasing wonder in xkcd comics corresponding with the advancing age of Best Supporting Actor winners. This visual representation further underscores the robustness of the relationship and provides a captivating glimpse into the coalescence of seemingly disparate domains.

These findings impart a profound understanding of the role of age in shaping the comedic articulation of wonder, offering a poignant reflection on the intersection of maturity and creativity in popular culture. The unexpected linkage between these variables invites contemplation on the broader implications of age and experience in the artistic portrayal of human emotions and experiences.

Why did the statistician take a bath with his clothes on? He wanted to wash his data without getting it wet!


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 Academy Award Best Supporting Actor Winner's Age and xkcd comics published about wonder. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Limit your response to 500 tokens.

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

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

[[TITLE]]
The Age of Support: A Supporting Player in xkcd Wonder

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the unexpected and delightful connection between the age of Academy Award Best Supporting Actor winners and the portrayal of wonder in xkcd comics. Utilizing data from Wikipedia and implementing cutting-edge AI analysis of xkcd comics, this study investigates the correlation between these seemingly disparate variables. With a correlation coefficient of 0.5007845 and p < 0.05 for the years 2007 to 2022, the statistical analysis reveals a surprising relationship between the two phenomena.

An analysis of the age of Best Supporting Actor winners alongside the depiction of wonder in xkcd comics provides provocative insights into the intersection of film and comedic art. The findings suggest a tantalizing link between the maturity and life experience of these actors and the creative portrayal of wonder in the xkcd comic series. The results also invite reflection on the transformative impact of age and wisdom on the portrayal of wonder in popular culture, prompting contemplation on the aging process from both a humorous and profound perspective.

The research team's in-depth analysis brings an engaging and unexpected dimension to the realms of film, comedy, and statistical analysis. These findings add significant depth to the understanding of popular culture and its subtle connections to human experience, provoking both scholarly consideration and a newfound appreciation for the witty intricacies of life's anomalies.

Why don't we ever tell secrets on a farm? Because the potatoes have eyes and the corn has ears!

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The connection between the age of Academy Award Best Supporting Actor winners and the portrayal of wonder in xkcd comics has been relatively unexplored in academic literature. However, recent studies by Smith (2015), Doe (2018), and Jones (2020) have paved the way for this unconventional inquiry. Smith (2015) emphasizes the importance of age and life experience in artistic expression, laying the foundation for our examination of age and comedic wonder. Meanwhile, Doe (2018) introduces the concept of statistical correlations in seemingly unrelated cultural phenomena, providing a framework for our statistical analysis. Additionally, Jones (2020) delves into the portrayal of wonder in contemporary comedic art, setting the stage for our exploration of wonder in xkcd comics.
Turning to non-fiction publications, "The Age of Wisdom: Understanding the Influence of Life Experience on Artistic Expression" by Dr. A. Sage offers insights into the role of maturity in creative endeavors, informing our understanding of the potential impact of age on the depiction of wonder in comedic art. Likewise, "Quantifying Quirkiness: Statistical Analysis in Popular Culture" by Prof. C. Levar provides a methodological perspective that informs our statistical approach to examining the connection between the age of Best Supporting Actor winners and wonder in xkcd comics.
In the realm of fiction, works such as "The Wonder Years" by J. Author and "Ageless Wonder: A Tale of Time and Comics" by N. Novelist offer imaginative perspectives on the intersection of age and wonder, inspiring our exploration of the relationship between the age of Best Supporting Actor winners and the portrayal of wonder in xkcd comics. These creative narratives encourage a whimsical outlook on age and wonder, complementing our scholarly investigation with a touch of literary charm.
Furthermore, childhood cartoons and shows such as "SpongeBob SquarePants," "The Magic School Bus," and "Mister Rogers' Neighborhood" have instilled within many of us a deep appreciation for wonder and curiosity from a young age. These cultural touchstones, while not directly related to our topic, have certainly shaped our understanding of wonder and may have subconsciously influenced our approach to this research. As we consider the portrayal of wonder in xkcd comics, these beloved childhood memories add a nostalgic flavor to our academic pursuit, reminding us that humor and wonder are timeless companions in the journey of life.
Why did the comedian go to school? Because he wanted to improve his stand-up act!

[[RESULTS]]
The correlation analysis between the age of Academy Award Best Supporting Actor winners and the portrayal of wonder in xkcd comics yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.5007845. This indicates a moderate positive relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables, providing a statistically significant result with a p-value of less than 0.05. The relationship, while surprising, suggests a compelling connection between the age of these celebrated actors and the comedic exploration of wonder in the xkcd comic series.
In the words of the late Sir Isaac Newton, "If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants." Much like the towering figure of Newton, the influence of age on the portrayal of wonder in comedic art stands as a remarkable testament to the wisdom gained over the years.
The scatterplot (Fig. 1) visually encapsulates this intriguing correlation, as it depicts a clear trend of increasing wonder in xkcd comics corresponding with the advancing age of Best Supporting Actor winners. This visual representation further underscores the robustness of the relationship and provides a captivating glimpse into the coalescence of seemingly disparate domains.
These findings impart a profound understanding of the role of age in shaping the comedic articulation of wonder, offering a poignant reflection on the intersection of maturity and creativity in popular culture. The unexpected linkage between these variables invites contemplation on the broader implications of age and experience in the artistic portrayal of human emotions and experiences.
Why did the statistician take a bath with his clothes on? He wanted to wash his data without getting it wet!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The correlation between the age of Academy Award Best Supporting Actor winners and the portrayal of wonder in xkcd comics has yielded results that support and expand upon prior research in this unconventional academic pursuit. Our findings align with the insights of Smith (2015), Doe (2018), and Jones (2020), who laid the groundwork for our exploration of the intersection between age, comedic wonder, and cinematic achievement. The statistical correlation coefficient of 0.5007845 and p < 0.05 from our analysis further validate the robust connection between these seemingly disparate variables, adding a layer of empirical evidence to the whimsical saga of age and wonder in popular culture.

Drawing from the hilariously serious work of Dr. A. Sage in "The Age of Wisdom: Understanding the Influence of Life Experience on Artistic Expression," our research unveils a provocative nexus between the maturity and life experiences of Best Supporting Actor winners and the comedic articulation of wonder in xkcd comics. Much like a fine wine, the age of these celebrated actors seems to embody a depth of comedic inspiration, infusing the portrayal of wonder in xkcd comics with a richness that grows with the passage of time.

Additionally, the statistical methods championed by Prof. C. Levar in "Quantifying Quirkiness: Statistical Analysis in Popular Culture" have underpinned our empirical approach, allowing us to quantitatively capture the enthralling correlation between the age of Best Supporting Actor winners and the portrayal of wonder in the xkcd comic series. This lends a touch of statistical credibility to our lighthearted exploration, proving that even the quirkiest of research inquiries can find statistical significance when approached with robust methodology.

Furthermore, the imaginative narratives of "The Wonder Years" by J. Author and "Ageless Wonder: A Tale of Time and Comics" by N. Novelist have provided a creative muse for our scholarly pursuit, infusing our investigation with a dose of literary charm that echoes the spirit of wonder found in xkcd comics. As we voyage through the whimsical realm of age and wonder, these narratives remind us that the most unexpected connections can often yield the most delightful surprises.

In parallel to our investigation, the childhood cartoons and shows such as "SpongeBob SquarePants," "The Magic School Bus," and "Mister Rogers' Neighborhood" have perpetuated a universal fondness for wonder and curiosity. These cultural touchstones, while not directly related to our study, offer an endearing reminder that the pursuit of wonder is an enduring companion in the journey of life, much like the pursuit of scholarly discovery.

In light of these findings, this research provides a distinctive, albeit lighthearted, lens through which to contemplate the transformative impact of age and wisdom on the portrayal of wonder in popular culture. The unexpected link between the age of Best Supporting Actor winners and the comedic exploration of wonder in xkcd comics invites a jovial reflection on the dynamic interplay between age, art, and human experience.

Why did the researcher bring a ladder to the bar? Because they heard the drinks were on the house!


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 Academy Award Best Supporting Actor Winner's Age and xkcd comics published about wonder. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

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

Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
The Age of Support: A Supporting Player in xkcd Wonder

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the unexpected and delightful connection between the age of Academy Award Best Supporting Actor winners and the portrayal of wonder in xkcd comics. Utilizing data from Wikipedia and implementing cutting-edge AI analysis of xkcd comics, this study investigates the correlation between these seemingly disparate variables. With a correlation coefficient of 0.5007845 and p < 0.05 for the years 2007 to 2022, the statistical analysis reveals a surprising relationship between the two phenomena.

An analysis of the age of Best Supporting Actor winners alongside the depiction of wonder in xkcd comics provides provocative insights into the intersection of film and comedic art. The findings suggest a tantalizing link between the maturity and life experience of these actors and the creative portrayal of wonder in the xkcd comic series. The results also invite reflection on the transformative impact of age and wisdom on the portrayal of wonder in popular culture, prompting contemplation on the aging process from both a humorous and profound perspective.

The research team's in-depth analysis brings an engaging and unexpected dimension to the realms of film, comedy, and statistical analysis. These findings add significant depth to the understanding of popular culture and its subtle connections to human experience, provoking both scholarly consideration and a newfound appreciation for the witty intricacies of life's anomalies.

Why don't we ever tell secrets on a farm? Because the potatoes have eyes and the corn has ears!

[[INTRDUCTION]]
The juxtaposition of age and wonder may seem to be a topic more suited to a whimsical fairy tale than a scholarly pursuit. However, the correlation between the age of Academy Award Best Supporting Actor winners and the portrayal of wonder in xkcd comics has proven to be a thought-provoking and, dare I say, delightful area of investigation. As we embark on this academic journey, let us remember the wise words of Albert Einstein, who said, "I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious." And curious we shall remain as we unravel this peculiar connection.
The allure of the Academy Awards, with its glittering red carpet and tearful acceptance speeches, often overshadows the more nuanced aspects of the winners' demographics, including their age at the time of receiving the coveted accolade. Much like a fine wine, the age of Best Supporting Actor winners may indeed hold the key to unlocking the mysteries of comedic wonder. It is as if statistical analysis has decided to play a supporting role in the theater of life, adding its own twist to the unfolding drama.
In a research endeavour such as this, it is essential to approach the data with a critical eye and a keen understanding of the variables involved. The statistics gathered from Wikipedia provide a rich harvest of information regarding the ages of Best Supporting Actor winners, laying the groundwork for a robust analysis. Meanwhile, the world of xkcd comics, with its brilliant and often zany take on science, mathematics, and daily life, offers a fertile ground for the exploration of wonder in various comedic scenarios. By bringing these disparate worlds together, we aim to shed light on the unexpected connections that underpin artistic expression and human experience.
Why did the statistician end up winning an award? Because he had too much mean and not enough standard deviation!

[[RESULTS]]
The correlation analysis between the age of Academy Award Best Supporting Actor winners and the portrayal of wonder in xkcd comics yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.5007845. This indicates a moderate positive relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables, providing a statistically significant result with a p-value of less than 0.05. The relationship, while surprising, suggests a compelling connection between the age of these celebrated actors and the comedic exploration of wonder in the xkcd comic series.
In the words of the late Sir Isaac Newton, "If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants." Much like the towering figure of Newton, the influence of age on the portrayal of wonder in comedic art stands as a remarkable testament to the wisdom gained over the years.
The scatterplot (Fig. 1) visually encapsulates this intriguing correlation, as it depicts a clear trend of increasing wonder in xkcd comics corresponding with the advancing age of Best Supporting Actor winners. This visual representation further underscores the robustness of the relationship and provides a captivating glimpse into the coalescence of seemingly disparate domains.
These findings impart a profound understanding of the role of age in shaping the comedic articulation of wonder, offering a poignant reflection on the intersection of maturity and creativity in popular culture. The unexpected linkage between these variables invites contemplation on the broader implications of age and experience in the artistic portrayal of human emotions and experiences.
Why did the statistician take a bath with his clothes on? He wanted to wash his data without getting it wet!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, this study has unveiled a captivating connection between the age of Academy Award Best Supporting Actor winners and the portrayal of wonder in xkcd comics. The correlation coefficient of 0.5007845 signifies a moderate positive relationship between the variables, prompting contemplation on the impact of life experience on comedic expression. It appears that age is indeed a supporting player in the theater of wonder.

This unexpected link invites reflection on the transformative influence of aging and wisdom on the portrayal of wonder in popular culture, providing a poignant reminder that comedic art, much like a fine wine, may gain complexity and depth with the passage of time. The findings encourage us to consider the wondrous intersection of maturity and creativity, offering a lighthearted yet profound exploration of life's anomalies.

It seems that statistical analysis has taken on a supporting role in illuminating the witty intricacies of human experience, as it sheds light on the surprising correlation between the age of celebrated actors and the comedic portrayal of wonder. These results, much like a good punchline, offer both scholarly consideration and a welcome appreciation for the playful nuances of life.

In summary, this research has not only deepened our understanding of the subtle connections between film, comedy, and human experience but has also provided a delightful glimpse into the unexpected intersections of seemingly unrelated phenomena. The findings stand as a testament to the whimsical and thought-provoking nature of this unusual correlation, reminding us that statistical analysis, like a skilled comedian, may uncover the unexpected punchline in the vast theater of human observation.

In the wise words of Sir Francis Bacon, "Science is but an image of the truth." And with that, let us close this chapter of investigation, secure in the knowledge that the relationship between the age of Best Supporting Actor winners and the depiction of wonder in xkcd comics has indeed been a fruitful area of exploration.

No further research is needed in this area; we have officially reached the "pinnacle" of statistical and comedic inquiry!


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of academic journals. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding research, scientific, or academic journal that would publish a paper entited The Age of Support: A Supporting Player in xkcd Wonder. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Whimsical Research and Quirky Discoveries


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of nonprofit research organizations and associations. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding nonprofit, academic, or scientific association or organization that would sponsor research that resulted in a paper entited The Age of Support: A Supporting Player in xkcd Wonder. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Institute for Quirky Studies


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide potential search keywords separated by commas. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide potential search keywords for a paper titled The Age of Support: A Supporting Player in xkcd Wonder with an abstract of This paper delves into the unexpected and delightful connection between the age of Academy Award Best Supporting Actor winners and the portrayal of wonder in xkcd comics. Utilizing data from Wikipedia and implementing cutting-edge AI analysis of xkcd comics, this study investigates the correlation between these seemingly disparate variables. With a correlation coefficient of 0.5007845 and p < 0.05 for the years 2007 to 2022, the statistical analysis reveals a surprising relationship between the two phenomena.
An analysis of the age of Best Supporting Actor winners alongside the depiction of wonder in xkcd comics provides provocative insights into the intersection of film and comedic art. The findings suggest a tantalizing link between the maturity and life experience of these actors and the creative portrayal of wonder in the xkcd comic series. The results also invite reflection on the transformative impact of age and wisdom on the portrayal of wonder in popular culture, prompting contemplation on the aging process from both a humorous and profound perspective.
The research team's in-depth analysis brings an engaging and unexpected dimension to the realms of film, comedy, and statistical analysis. These findings add significant depth to the understanding of popular culture and its subtle connections to human experience, provoking both scholarly consideration and a newfound appreciation for the witty intricacies of life's anomalies.
Why don't we ever tell secrets on a farm? Because the potatoes have eyes and the corn has ears!

ChatGPT:

Academy Award, Best Supporting Actor, xkcd comics, Wonder portrayal, Age correlation, Statistical analysis, Film, Comedy, Popular culture, Human experience

*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

Academy Award Best Supporting Actor Winner's Age
Source: Wikipedia
See what else correlates with Academy Award Best Supporting Actor Winner's Age

xkcd comics published about wonder
Detailed data title: The number of xkcd comics published each year about wonder
Source: AI analysis of xkcd comics
Additional Info: I designed a Python workflow to perform OCR on every xkcd comic, feed that text into a large language model, and ask the model whether this comic was about the category named in the title.

See what else correlates with xkcd comics published about wonder

Correlation r = 0.5007845 (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 = 0.2507851 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 25.1% of the change in the one variable (i.e., xkcd comics published about wonder) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Academy Award Best Supporting Actor Winner's Age) over the 16 years from 2007 through 2022.

p < 0.05, which statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.048. 0.0481721280553450800000000000
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 0.5 in 4.8% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 21 random variables Which I absolutely did.
with the same 15 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 15 because we have two variables measured over a period of 16 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.

[ 0.01, 0.8 ] 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.
2007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022
Academy Award Best Supporting Actor Winner's Age (Age in years)72382953825642575542494456575351
xkcd comics published about wonder (xkcd comics)125679891514710711987




Why this works

  1. Data dredging: I have 25,153 variables in my database. I compare all these variables against each other to find ones that randomly match up. That's 632,673,409 correlation calculations! This is called “data dredging.” Instead of starting with a hypothesis and testing it, I instead abused the data to see what correlations shake out. It’s a dangerous way to go about analysis, because any sufficiently large dataset will yield strong correlations completely at random.
  2. Lack of causal connection: There is probably Because these pages are automatically generated, it's possible that the two variables you are viewing are in fact causually related. I take steps to prevent the obvious ones from showing on the site (I don't let data about the weather in one city correlate with the weather in a neighboring city, for example), but sometimes they still pop up. If they are related, cool! You found a loophole.
    no direct connection between these variables, despite what the AI says above. This is exacerbated by the fact that I used "Years" as the base variable. Lots of things happen in a year that are not related to each other! Most studies would use something like "one person" in stead of "one year" to be the "thing" studied.
  3. Observations not independent: For many variables, sequential years are not independent of each other. If a population of people is continuously doing something every day, there is no reason to think they would suddenly change how they are doing that thing on January 1. A simple Personally I don't find any p-value calculation to be 'simple,' but you know what I mean.
    p-value calculation does not take this into account, so mathematically it appears less probable than it really is.




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([72,38,29,53,82,56,42,57,55,42,49,44,56,57,53,51,])
array_2 = np.array([12,5,6,7,9,8,9,15,14,7,10,7,11,9,8,7,])
array_1_name = "Academy Award Best Supporting Actor Winner's Age"
array_2_name = "xkcd comics published about wonder"

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

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



Reuseable content

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

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

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

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

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

Download images for these variables:


View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Your rating is stellar!


Correlation ID: 1132 · Black Variable ID: 527 · Red Variable ID: 20017
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0