Spurious correlation #1,206 · View random
A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Nuclear power generation in Belgium and the second variable is Automotive recalls for issues with the Child Seat. The chart goes from 1980 to 2021, and the two variables track closely in value over that time.

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Nuclear power generation in Belgium and the second variable is Automotive recalls for issues with the Child Seat. The chart goes from 1980 to 2021, and the two variables track closely in value over that time.

Download png, svg

AI explanation

As nuclear power generation in Belgium increased, it led to a surge in baby and toddler energy levels. This newfound atomic-like vigor among young children put excessive strain on the child seats in cars, leading to the need for more recalls. The tiny tots were simply harnessing the power of nuclear excitement, causing a chain reaction of automotive safety concerns. It seems the nuclear option inadvertently sparked a high-energy response from the little ones, putting the car seat manufacturers in quite a radioactive predicament!

^{Show image generation prompt} Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image of a glitch art cityscape. In the forefront, there is a car parked on the side of the street, and inside the car, a child seat is visible. In the background, a nuclear power plant looms, emitting a faint glow. The atmosphere is filled with glitchy electromagnetic waves. The glitch art effect should create a sense of disturbance, with the unexpected unlatching of the child seat and the flashing recall notice on the car's dashboard adding to the surreal and mysterious ambiance. 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: The increase in nuclear power generation in Belgium caused automotive recalls for child seat issues to also increase due to the electromagnetic waves emitted from the power plants, which inadvertently activated the child seat release mechanisms.. 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: A Discovery magazine cover image Glitch art Cyber folk Cyber folk Voxel art
ChatGPT: Glitch art

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. The increase in nuclear power generation in Belgium caused automotive recalls for child seat issues to also increase due to the electromagnetic waves emitted from the power plants, which inadvertently activated the child seat release mechanisms.
ChatGPT: Imagine a bustling city with a view of a nuclear power plant in the background. A car parked nearby has a child seat inside. As the power plant hums in the distance, electromagnetic waves invisibly emanate, and the child seat within the car unexpectedly unlatches, causing an alert and a recall notice to flash on the car's dashboard.

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: [ Glitch art ] and depicting this scene: Imagine a bustling city with a view of a nuclear power plant in the background. A car parked nearby has a child seat inside. As the power plant hums in the distance, electromagnetic waves invisibly emanate, and the child seat within the car unexpectedly unlatches, causing an alert and a recall notice to flash on the car's dashboard. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image of a glitch art cityscape. In the forefront, there is a car parked on the side of the street, and inside the car, a child seat is visible. In the background, a nuclear power plant looms, emitting a faint glow. The atmosphere is filled with glitchy electromagnetic waves. The glitch art effect should create a sense of disturbance, with the unexpected unlatching of the child seat and the flashing recall notice on the car's dashboard adding to the surreal and mysterious ambiance.

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

I sequence the requests into multiple prompts because I find GPT 3.5 to perform much better with short, well-managed contexts. Thus, I track the context directly in Python and only ask ChatGPT targeted questions.
^{Show prompt for explanation} Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 (fine-tuned)
System prompt: You provide humorous responses in the form of plausible sounding explanations for correlations. You assume the correlation is causative for the purpose of the explanation even if it is ridiculous. You do not chat with the user, you only reply with the causal connection explanation and nothing else.
User prompt: Please make up a funny explanation for how an increase in Nuclear power generation in Belgium caused Automotive recalls for issues with the Child Seat to increase.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)

Under the Radiator: An Atomic Connection Between Nuclear Power Generation in Belgium and Automotive Recalls for Child Seat Issues

The International Journal of Nuclear Fission and Family Safety

Jan 2024

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

^{Show prompt used to generate this paper} Quick note: This sequence is long and repetitive. That's how the prompt engineering works for this one. I manage the output in Python to format it into this PDF.

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

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Nuclear power generation in Belgium and Automotive recalls for issues with the Child Seat. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

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

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then devolve ever further, and mention something completely ridiculous, like you conducted literature review by reading CVS receipts.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Under the Radiator: An Atomic Connection Between Nuclear Power Generation in Belgium and Automotive Recalls for Child Seat Issues"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study scrutinizes the curious relationship between nuclear power generation in Belgium and automotive recalls specifically related to child seat issues. While nuclear power is often associated with efficiency and reliability, our findings reveal a correlation between nuclear power output in Belgium and automotive recalls for child seat problems. Using data sourced from the Energy Information Administration and the US Department of Transportation, we calculated a correlation coefficient of 0.5333277 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning 1980 through 2021. Our findings suggest that there may be more to the "atomic" nature of these two seemingly unrelated occurrences than meets the eye.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
In this paper, we delve into the intriguing and somewhat puzzling association between nuclear power generation in Belgium and the frequency of automotive recalls specifically related to child seat issues. While one may initially dismiss these two seemingly disparate phenomena as entirely unrelated, our investigation has uncovered a potential atomic connection that defies conventional wisdom and leads one to ponder the underlying forces at play. It is as if the invisible hand of nuclear power has stretched its fingers into the realm of child seat safety without so much as a warning label.
Nuclear power, with its elusive and somewhat enigmatic nature, has long been lauded for its ability to generate large amounts of energy with relatively low greenhouse gas emissions, earning it a prominent place in the energy landscape. On the other hand, the issue of child seat recalls in the automotive industry carries its own weight, often leaving parents grappling with the compatibility, safety, and ease of use of these essential safety devices. The juxtaposition of these two domains sets the stage for an investigation that even Einstein himself would have found intriguing.
It is against this backdrop of scientific curiosity and statistical intrigue that we strive to uncover the potential link between these two phenomena. As we cautiously navigate through the labyrinth of data and statistical analyses, we will endeavor to shed light on the elusive correlation between nuclear power output in Belgium and the occurrence of automotive recalls for child seat issues. Our task is akin to untangling a complex molecular structure, where each variable represents a proton or electron, and the correlation coefficient serves as the chemical bond holding them together. We aim to unravel this atomic enigma with all the precision and rigor befitting such a charged topic.
As we embark on this journey, we invite the reader to join us in unlocking the secrets that lie "under the radiator", where the subtle interplay of nuclear energy and automotive safety issues may prove to be more intertwined than initially perceived. With a dash of scientific skepticism and a pinch of statistical scrutiny, we aim to challenge conventional wisdom and present an innovative perspective that may just "power" up our understanding of these seemingly unrelated occurrences.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The potential correlation between nuclear power generation in Belgium and automotive recalls related to child seat issues has garnered limited attention in academic literature. Our review of existing studies reveals that the majority of research in this area has focused on either nuclear power's impact on the environment or automotive safety concerns unrelated to nuclear power generation.

In "The Nuclear Question" by Smith, a comprehensive analysis of nuclear power's environmental impact is presented, yet the potential connection to automotive recalls remains unexplored. Similarly, Doe's study "Automotive Safety in the Modern Era" delves into the various safety features of automobiles, but notably omits any mention of the potential influence of nuclear power output.

Moving into less conventional sources, "Nuclear Energy: Principles, Practices, and Prospects" by Weston covers the technical aspects of nuclear power generation, providing a thorough account of reactor design and operation. While the book does not directly address automotive safety, its insights into nuclear technology are invaluable.

In contrast, the fictional thriller "Power Surge" by Jones portrays an imagined scenario where nuclear power malfunctions lead to chaos and mayhem on the roads. Although a work of fiction, the novel offers a unique perspective on the dangers of nuclear mishaps and their potential repercussions on automotive safety.

Going even further afield, "The Atomic Adventures of Andy the Ant" by McCavity introduces a whimsical account of an anthropomorphic ant's adventures in a world dominated by nuclear-powered appliances. While clearly light-hearted and speculative, this text adds a touch of levity to the otherwise serious consideration of nuclear power's influence on automotive safety.

As a more unconventional approach, we meticulously scrutinized grocery store receipts, Facebook memes, and classified advertisements in local newspapers, seeking any clues or references to the peculiar connection between nuclear power outputs in Belgium and automotive recalls for issues with child seats. Alas, our efforts in these unorthodox realms yielded no tangible evidence or theoretical insights, leaving us to acknowledge the boundary between scholarly pursuit and sheer absurdity.

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 Nuclear power generation in Belgium and Automotive recalls for issues with the Child Seat. 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 Energy Information Administration and US DOT . You used data from 1980 to 2021

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]]
"Under the Radiator: An Atomic Connection Between Nuclear Power Generation in Belgium and Automotive Recalls for Child Seat Issues"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study scrutinizes the curious relationship between nuclear power generation in Belgium and automotive recalls specifically related to child seat issues. While nuclear power is often associated with efficiency and reliability, our findings reveal a correlation between nuclear power output in Belgium and automotive recalls for child seat problems. Using data sourced from the Energy Information Administration and the US Department of Transportation, we calculated a correlation coefficient of 0.5333277 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning 1980 through 2021. Our findings suggest that there may be more to the "atomic" nature of these two seemingly unrelated occurrences than meets the eye.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
In this paper, we delve into the intriguing and somewhat puzzling association between nuclear power generation in Belgium and the frequency of automotive recalls specifically related to child seat issues. While one may initially dismiss these two seemingly disparate phenomena as entirely unrelated, our investigation has uncovered a potential atomic connection that defies conventional wisdom and leads one to ponder the underlying forces at play. It is as if the invisible hand of nuclear power has stretched its fingers into the realm of child seat safety without so much as a warning label.
Nuclear power, with its elusive and somewhat enigmatic nature, has long been lauded for its ability to generate large amounts of energy with relatively low greenhouse gas emissions, earning it a prominent place in the energy landscape. On the other hand, the issue of child seat recalls in the automotive industry carries its own weight, often leaving parents grappling with the compatibility, safety, and ease of use of these essential safety devices. The juxtaposition of these two domains sets the stage for an investigation that even Einstein himself would have found intriguing.
It is against this backdrop of scientific curiosity and statistical intrigue that we strive to uncover the potential link between these two phenomena. As we cautiously navigate through the labyrinth of data and statistical analyses, we will endeavor to shed light on the elusive correlation between nuclear power output in Belgium and the occurrence of automotive recalls for child seat issues. Our task is akin to untangling a complex molecular structure, where each variable represents a proton or electron, and the correlation coefficient serves as the chemical bond holding them together. We aim to unravel this atomic enigma with all the precision and rigor befitting such a charged topic.
As we embark on this journey, we invite the reader to join us in unlocking the secrets that lie "under the radiator", where the subtle interplay of nuclear energy and automotive safety issues may prove to be more intertwined than initially perceived. With a dash of scientific skepticism and a pinch of statistical scrutiny, we aim to challenge conventional wisdom and present an innovative perspective that may just "power" up our understanding of these seemingly unrelated occurrences.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

Data Collection:
The data for this study was gathered from the Energy Information Administration and the US Department of Transportation. These sources provided a wealth of information pertaining to nuclear power generation in Belgium and automotive recalls for child seat issues. The data spanned a period from 1980 through 2021, capturing decades of atomic energy prowess and automotive safety conundrums. While the internet was scoured for data, it was mostly just an excuse to indulge in copious amounts of coffee and procrastinate on other responsibilities, all in the name of scientific inquiry.

Variable Selection:
The primary variables examined in this study were the nuclear power generation output in Belgium and the occurrence of automotive recalls specifically related to child seat issues. Secondary variables included time, which marched on with unyielding force, and the occasional outlier that raised an eyebrow and forced the team to double-check their calculations. The relationship between these variables was probed and poked with the analytical equivalent of a scientific cattle prod to discern any potential connections lurking in the data.

Statistical Analysis:
To assess the correlation between nuclear power generation and automotive recalls for child seat issues, a correlation coefficient was calculated. This coefficient served as a numeric indicator of the degree and direction of any relationship between the two variables, not unlike a compass guiding researchers through the tempestuous sea of data. The significance level (p-value) was also computed to determine the likelihood of observing such a relationship by mere chance, akin to separating the scientific wheat from the chaff.

Data Transformation:
The collected data underwent rigorous preparation and transformation processes to ensure its suitability for statistical analysis. Outliers were treated with the analytical equivalent of a gentle scolding, and missing data was imputed with caution, as if delicately filling in the gaps of a scientific crossword puzzle. The resultant dataset was molded and sculpted into a form conducive to unraveling the elusive link between nuclear power output and automotive recalls for child seat issues.

Mapping and Visualization:
In addition to statistical analyses, the data was mapped and visualized to provide a spatial and graphical representation of the intricate interplay between nuclear energy and automotive safety concerns. This process involved assembling a mosaic of data points, not unlike piecing together a scientific jigsaw puzzle, in an endeavor to bring to light the nuanced and potentially atomic relationship under investigation.

Ethical Considerations:
Throughout the research process, ethical guidelines were adhered to with the fervor of a devoted lab assistant meticulously following a scientific protocol. Privacy and confidentiality of the data were upheld with utmost care, ensuring that the rights of both nuclear reactors and child seats were respected in the pursuit of scientific knowledge.

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 Nuclear power generation in Belgium and Automotive recalls for issues with the Child Seat. 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 Energy Information Administration and US DOT .

For the time period 1980 to 2021, you found a correlation 0.5333277, r-squared of 0.2844385, 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]]
"Under the Radiator: An Atomic Connection Between Nuclear Power Generation in Belgium and Automotive Recalls for Child Seat Issues"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study scrutinizes the curious relationship between nuclear power generation in Belgium and automotive recalls specifically related to child seat issues. While nuclear power is often associated with efficiency and reliability, our findings reveal a correlation between nuclear power output in Belgium and automotive recalls for child seat problems. Using data sourced from the Energy Information Administration and the US Department of Transportation, we calculated a correlation coefficient of 0.5333277 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning 1980 through 2021. Our findings suggest that there may be more to the "atomic" nature of these two seemingly unrelated occurrences than meets the eye.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
In this paper, we delve into the intriguing and somewhat puzzling association between nuclear power generation in Belgium and the frequency of automotive recalls specifically related to child seat issues. While one may initially dismiss these two seemingly disparate phenomena as entirely unrelated, our investigation has uncovered a potential atomic connection that defies conventional wisdom and leads one to ponder the underlying forces at play. It is as if the invisible hand of nuclear power has stretched its fingers into the realm of child seat safety without so much as a warning label.
Nuclear power, with its elusive and somewhat enigmatic nature, has long been lauded for its ability to generate large amounts of energy with relatively low greenhouse gas emissions, earning it a prominent place in the energy landscape. On the other hand, the issue of child seat recalls in the automotive industry carries its own weight, often leaving parents grappling with the compatibility, safety, and ease of use of these essential safety devices. The juxtaposition of these two domains sets the stage for an investigation that even Einstein himself would have found intriguing.
It is against this backdrop of scientific curiosity and statistical intrigue that we strive to uncover the potential link between these two phenomena. As we cautiously navigate through the labyrinth of data and statistical analyses, we will endeavor to shed light on the elusive correlation between nuclear power output in Belgium and the occurrence of automotive recalls for child seat issues. Our task is akin to untangling a complex molecular structure, where each variable represents a proton or electron, and the correlation coefficient serves as the chemical bond holding them together. We aim to unravel this atomic enigma with all the precision and rigor befitting such a charged topic.
As we embark on this journey, we invite the reader to join us in unlocking the secrets that lie "under the radiator", where the subtle interplay of nuclear energy and automotive safety issues may prove to be more intertwined than initially perceived. With a dash of scientific skepticism and a pinch of statistical scrutiny, we aim to challenge conventional wisdom and present an innovative perspective that may just "power" up our understanding of these seemingly unrelated occurrences.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]

ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The examination of the correlation between nuclear power generation in Belgium and automotive recalls related to child seat issues revealed a statistically significant relationship. Over the period of 1980 to 2021, the correlation coefficient was found to be 0.5333277, with an r-squared value of 0.2844385, and a p-value less than 0.01. This suggests a moderately strong positive correlation between the two variables, prompting further investigation into the underlying mechanisms at play.

One figure (Fig. 1) illustrates the scatterplot demonstrating the robust correlation between nuclear power generation in Belgium and automotive recalls for child seat issues. The figure visually encapsulates the compelling connection between these seemingly disparate domains, inviting the reader to ponder the potential atomic forces at play.

The findings of this study lend support to the notion that there may indeed be more than meets the eye when it comes to the "atomic" link between nuclear power output and automotive safety concerns. The statistical evidence points to a relationship that transcends the surface-level differences between these two realms, potentially shedding light on the deeper interplay of energy production and vehicular safety. This unexpected correlation serves as a reminder that even in the realm of empirical inquiry, there may be hidden connections waiting to be unearthed, much like uncovering a hidden treasure trove of data.

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 Nuclear power generation in Belgium and Automotive recalls for issues with the Child Seat. 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]]
"Under the Radiator: An Atomic Connection Between Nuclear Power Generation in Belgium and Automotive Recalls for Child Seat Issues"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study scrutinizes the curious relationship between nuclear power generation in Belgium and automotive recalls specifically related to child seat issues. While nuclear power is often associated with efficiency and reliability, our findings reveal a correlation between nuclear power output in Belgium and automotive recalls for child seat problems. Using data sourced from the Energy Information Administration and the US Department of Transportation, we calculated a correlation coefficient of 0.5333277 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning 1980 through 2021. Our findings suggest that there may be more to the "atomic" nature of these two seemingly unrelated occurrences than meets the eye.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The potential correlation between nuclear power generation in Belgium and automotive recalls related to child seat issues has garnered limited attention in academic literature. Our review of existing studies reveals that the majority of research in this area has focused on either nuclear power's impact on the environment or automotive safety concerns unrelated to nuclear power generation.
In "The Nuclear Question" by Smith, a comprehensive analysis of nuclear power's environmental impact is presented, yet the potential connection to automotive recalls remains unexplored. Similarly, Doe's study "Automotive Safety in the Modern Era" delves into the various safety features of automobiles, but notably omits any mention of the potential influence of nuclear power output.
Moving into less conventional sources, "Nuclear Energy: Principles, Practices, and Prospects" by Weston covers the technical aspects of nuclear power generation, providing a thorough account of reactor design and operation. While the book does not directly address automotive safety, its insights into nuclear technology are invaluable.
In contrast, the fictional thriller "Power Surge" by Jones portrays an imagined scenario where nuclear power malfunctions lead to chaos and mayhem on the roads. Although a work of fiction, the novel offers a unique perspective on the dangers of nuclear mishaps and their potential repercussions on automotive safety.
Going even further afield, "The Atomic Adventures of Andy the Ant" by McCavity introduces a whimsical account of an anthropomorphic ant's adventures in a world dominated by nuclear-powered appliances. While clearly light-hearted and speculative, this text adds a touch of levity to the otherwise serious consideration of nuclear power's influence on automotive safety.
As a more unconventional approach, we meticulously scrutinized grocery store receipts, Facebook memes, and classified advertisements in local newspapers, seeking any clues or references to the peculiar connection between nuclear power outputs in Belgium and automotive recalls for issues with child seats. Alas, our efforts in these unorthodox realms yielded no tangible evidence or theoretical insights, leaving us to acknowledge the boundary between scholarly pursuit and sheer absurdity.

[[RESULTS]]
The examination of the correlation between nuclear power generation in Belgium and automotive recalls related to child seat issues revealed a statistically significant relationship. Over the period of 1980 to 2021, the correlation coefficient was found to be 0.5333277, with an r-squared value of 0.2844385, and a p-value less than 0.01. This suggests a moderately strong positive correlation between the two variables, prompting further investigation into the underlying mechanisms at play.
One figure (Fig. 1) illustrates the scatterplot demonstrating the robust correlation between nuclear power generation in Belgium and automotive recalls for child seat issues. The figure visually encapsulates the compelling connection between these seemingly disparate domains, inviting the reader to ponder the potential atomic forces at play.
The findings of this study lend support to the notion that there may indeed be more than meets the eye when it comes to the "atomic" link between nuclear power output and automotive safety concerns. The statistical evidence points to a relationship that transcends the surface-level differences between these two realms, potentially shedding light on the deeper interplay of energy production and vehicular safety. This unexpected correlation serves as a reminder that even in the realm of empirical inquiry, there may be hidden connections waiting to be unearthed, much like uncovering a hidden treasure trove of data.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The investigation into the peculiar connection between nuclear power generation in Belgium and automotive recalls for child seat issues has yielded thought-provoking findings. The statistically significant correlation uncovered in this study aligns with prior research that has, albeit in less conventional spheres, hinted at the potential link between these seemingly disparate domains.

Indeed, while the literature review may have initially appeared light-hearted with the mention of unconventional sources such as "Power Surge" by Jones and "The Atomic Adventures of Andy the Ant" by McCavity, the results of this study have seemingly validated their, perhaps, more profound insights. The statistical evidence presented here offers compelling support for the notion that the "atomic" forces may indeed extend beyond the realms of nuclear physics and permeate into the world of automotive safety, much like a neutron with a particularly far-reaching radius of influence.

The research community's understanding of the nuanced interplay between nuclear power output and automotive safety has been enriched by the revelation of this correlation. It brings to mind the age-old adage that sometimes, unexpected connections lurk in the most unexplored corners, much like electrons in a quantum state of superposition, seemingly existing in multiple places at once.

The robust correlation coefficient, r-squared value, and p-value all point to a relationship that cannot be easily dismissed as mere happenstance, much like the stubborn adherence of protons to their nucleus. One cannot help but reflect on the intricate dance of variables at play, akin to the complex interactions within an atomic nucleus.

Thus, as researchers aim to unravel the mysteries of our interconnected world, it becomes increasingly clear that no variable stands alone. Much like the isotopes of an element, seemingly identical yet subtly different, these findings underscore the need for continued exploration of the hidden forces that shape our reality, whether they stem from atomic nuclei or statistical correlations.

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 Nuclear power generation in Belgium and Automotive recalls for issues with the Child Seat. 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]]
"Under the Radiator: An Atomic Connection Between Nuclear Power Generation in Belgium and Automotive Recalls for Child Seat Issues"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study scrutinizes the curious relationship between nuclear power generation in Belgium and automotive recalls specifically related to child seat issues. While nuclear power is often associated with efficiency and reliability, our findings reveal a correlation between nuclear power output in Belgium and automotive recalls for child seat problems. Using data sourced from the Energy Information Administration and the US Department of Transportation, we calculated a correlation coefficient of 0.5333277 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning 1980 through 2021. Our findings suggest that there may be more to the "atomic" nature of these two seemingly unrelated occurrences than meets the eye.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
In this paper, we delve into the intriguing and somewhat puzzling association between nuclear power generation in Belgium and the frequency of automotive recalls specifically related to child seat issues. While one may initially dismiss these two seemingly disparate phenomena as entirely unrelated, our investigation has uncovered a potential atomic connection that defies conventional wisdom and leads one to ponder the underlying forces at play. It is as if the invisible hand of nuclear power has stretched its fingers into the realm of child seat safety without so much as a warning label.
Nuclear power, with its elusive and somewhat enigmatic nature, has long been lauded for its ability to generate large amounts of energy with relatively low greenhouse gas emissions, earning it a prominent place in the energy landscape. On the other hand, the issue of child seat recalls in the automotive industry carries its own weight, often leaving parents grappling with the compatibility, safety, and ease of use of these essential safety devices. The juxtaposition of these two domains sets the stage for an investigation that even Einstein himself would have found intriguing.
It is against this backdrop of scientific curiosity and statistical intrigue that we strive to uncover the potential link between these two phenomena. As we cautiously navigate through the labyrinth of data and statistical analyses, we will endeavor to shed light on the elusive correlation between nuclear power output in Belgium and the occurrence of automotive recalls for child seat issues. Our task is akin to untangling a complex molecular structure, where each variable represents a proton or electron, and the correlation coefficient serves as the chemical bond holding them together. We aim to unravel this atomic enigma with all the precision and rigor befitting such a charged topic.
As we embark on this journey, we invite the reader to join us in unlocking the secrets that lie "under the radiator", where the subtle interplay of nuclear energy and automotive safety issues may prove to be more intertwined than initially perceived. With a dash of scientific skepticism and a pinch of statistical scrutiny, we aim to challenge conventional wisdom and present an innovative perspective that may just "power" up our understanding of these seemingly unrelated occurrences.

[[RESULTS]]
The examination of the correlation between nuclear power generation in Belgium and automotive recalls related to child seat issues revealed a statistically significant relationship. Over the period of 1980 to 2021, the correlation coefficient was found to be 0.5333277, with an r-squared value of 0.2844385, and a p-value less than 0.01. This suggests a moderately strong positive correlation between the two variables, prompting further investigation into the underlying mechanisms at play.
One figure (Fig. 1) illustrates the scatterplot demonstrating the robust correlation between nuclear power generation in Belgium and automotive recalls for child seat issues. The figure visually encapsulates the compelling connection between these seemingly disparate domains, inviting the reader to ponder the potential atomic forces at play.
The findings of this study lend support to the notion that there may indeed be more than meets the eye when it comes to the "atomic" link between nuclear power output and automotive safety concerns. The statistical evidence points to a relationship that transcends the surface-level differences between these two realms, potentially shedding light on the deeper interplay of energy production and vehicular safety. This unexpected correlation serves as a reminder that even in the realm of empirical inquiry, there may be hidden connections waiting to be unearthed, much like uncovering a hidden treasure trove of data.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our investigation into the curious correlation between nuclear power generation in Belgium and automotive recalls for child seat issues has yielded compelling evidence of a statistically significant relationship. The robust correlation coefficient and p-value below 0.01 speak volumes about the potential atomic forces at play, as if the very nucleus of these phenomena is intricately intertwined. One might say that this connection "radiates" a certain degree of intrigue.

Our findings, much like a surprise nuclear reaction, challenge conventional wisdom and prompt us to reconsider the underlying dynamics between energy production and vehicular safety. The notion of atomic forces extending their reach into the realm of child seat recalls may seem as unlikely as witnessing a physicist at a car seat fitting. Nevertheless, the data speaks for itself, prompting us to ponder the potential mechanisms that underpin this unexpected relationship.

As we reflect on the implications of our findings, it is evident that this curious correlation may open doors to new avenues of inquiry and speculation, much like discovering an uncharted atomic particle. The fusion of nuclear power and automotive safety concerns in the crucible of statistical analysis has given rise to an unexpected synergy, challenging us to reevaluate our understanding of these seemingly unrelated domains.

It is therefore with a dose of scientific curiosity and an appreciation for statistical serendipity that we assert the need for further exploration into this atomic enigma. Future research in this area may unravel even more "nuclear secrets" related to automotive safety, much like a physicist unraveling the mysteries of the universe. However, at this juncture, our findings point to a compelling correlation that warrants attention and further investigation.

In light of this, we posit that no more research is needed in the foreseeable future to establish a clear connection between nuclear power generation in Belgium and automotive recalls for child seat issues.

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 Under the Radiator: An Atomic Connection Between Nuclear Power Generation in Belgium and Automotive Recalls for Child Seat Issues. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The International Journal of Nuclear Fission and Family Safety

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 Under the Radiator: An Atomic Connection Between Nuclear Power Generation in Belgium and Automotive Recalls for Child Seat Issues. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

Society for Quirky Interdisciplinary Research 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 Under the Radiator: An Atomic Connection Between Nuclear Power Generation in Belgium and Automotive Recalls for Child Seat Issues with an abstract of This study scrutinizes the curious relationship between nuclear power generation in Belgium and automotive recalls specifically related to child seat issues. While nuclear power is often associated with efficiency and reliability, our findings reveal a correlation between nuclear power output in Belgium and automotive recalls for child seat problems. Using data sourced from the Energy Information Administration and the US Department of Transportation, we calculated a correlation coefficient of 0.5333277 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning 1980 through 2021. Our findings suggest that there may be more to the "atomic" nature of these two seemingly unrelated occurrences than meets the eye.

ChatGPT:

nuclear power generation, Belgium, automotive recalls, child seat issues, correlation, Energy Information Administration, US Department of Transportation, atomic connection, nuclear power output, efficiency, reliability

*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

Nuclear power generation in Belgium
Detailed data title: Total nuclear power generation in Belgium in billion kWh
Source: Energy Information Administration
See what else correlates with Nuclear power generation in Belgium

Automotive recalls for issues with the Child Seat
Source: US DOT
See what else correlates with Automotive recalls for issues with the Child Seat

Correlation r = 0.5333277 (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 = 0.2844385 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 28.4% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Automotive recalls for issues with the Child Seat) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Nuclear power generation in Belgium) over the 42 years from 1980 through 2021.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.00028.^Show 0.0002761099168341818000000000
The p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme.^Note More specifically the p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme if we had only tested one pair of variables one time.

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

Who is going to stop me? p-value reporting doesn't require me to report how many calculations I had to go through in order to find a low p-value!
On average, you will find a correaltion as strong as 0.53 in 0.028% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 3,622 random variables^Note Which I absolutely did.
with the same 41 degrees of freedom, ^Note Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 41 because we have two variables measured over a period of 42 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.

[ 0.27, 0.72 ] 95% correlation confidence interval (using the Fisher z-transformation)
^{Read more about the confidence interval} The confidence interval is an estimate the range of the value of the correlation coefficient, using the correlation itself as an input. The values are meant to be the low and high end of the correlation coefficient with 95% confidence.

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

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

Still, sometimes one of the variables has more years of data available than the other. This page only shows the overlapping years. To see all the years, click on "See what else correlates with..." link above.

	1980	1981	1982	1983	1984	1985	1986	1987	1988	1989	1990	1991	1992	1993	1994	1995	1996	1997	1998	1999	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016	2017	2018	2019	2020	2021
Nuclear power generation in Belgium (Billion kWh)	11.909	12.219	14.752	22.832	26.359	32.692	37.302	39.764	40.887	39.104	40.586	40.718	41.283	39.831	38.593	39.288	41.169	45.04	43.856	46.566	45.749	44.032	44.992	45.011	44.946	45.335	44.314	45.853	43.359	44.96	45.728	45.942	38.464	40.632	32.094	24.825	41.4305	40.1285	27.1263	41.3056	32.6058	47.8917
Automotive recalls for issues with the Child Seat (Recalls)	1	1	2	1	2	2	4	3	3	7	14	14	8	4	7	6	5	10	5	6	8	10	8	11	3	8	5	10	10	8	6	1	3	4	7	7	11	4	4	4	1	11

Why this works

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

Try it yourself

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    return correlation, r_squared, p_value

# These are the arrays for the variables shown on this page, but you can modify them to be any two sets of numbers
array_1 = np.array([11.909,12.219,14.752,22.832,26.359,32.692,37.302,39.764,40.887,39.104,40.586,40.718,41.283,39.831,38.593,39.288,41.169,45.04,43.856,46.566,45.749,44.032,44.992,45.011,44.946,45.335,44.314,45.853,43.359,44.96,45.728,45.942,38.464,40.632,32.094,24.825,41.4305,40.1285,27.1263,41.3056,32.6058,47.8917,])
array_2 = np.array([1,1,2,1,2,2,4,3,3,7,14,14,8,4,7,6,5,10,5,6,8,10,8,11,3,8,5,10,10,8,6,1,3,4,7,7,11,4,4,4,1,11,])
array_1_name = "Nuclear power generation in Belgium"
array_2_name = "Automotive recalls for issues with the Child Seat"

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

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

Reuseable content

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

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

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

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

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

Download images for these variables:

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

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

Alternatively you can use a tool like Inkscape.
High resolution line chart, optimized for mobile
Alternative high resolution line chart
Scatterplot
Portable line chart (png)
Portable line chart (png), optimized for mobile
Line chart for only Nuclear power generation in Belgium
Line chart for only Automotive recalls for issues with the Child Seat
The spurious research paper: Under the Radiator: An Atomic Connection Between Nuclear Power Generation in Belgium and Automotive Recalls for Child Seat Issues

View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Thanks for being the explorer we needed!

Correlation ID: 1206 · Black Variable ID: 23505 · Red Variable ID: 1114


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