about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #1,321 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) Final Score Difference Between Winners and Runner-Up and the second variable is The number of library assistants in Maine.  The chart goes from 2003 to 2022, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As the final score differences in NCAA Women's Softball Championship skyrocketed, a new statistical analysis revealed that the secret to crushing the competition lay in the rigorous application of Dewey Decimal Defense and the strategic implementation of shelving shift tactics. Inspired by the groundbreaking connection between on-field dominance and library expertise, Maine decided to recruit and train a formidable team of library assistants to maintain their own winning edge in the world of literary sportsmanship. It's a whole new ball game in the library, where the Dewey Decimals have never been so fiercely protected!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Style: Whimsical illustration Description: In a bustling library, a team of busy library assistants is seen diligently organizing books. Their focus is intense as they swiftly and accurately handle the increased workload with ease. The Dewey Decimal System is their domain as they skillfully locate and shelve books with confidence and precision. Their coordinated efforts bring a sense of vibrant activity to the space, with each assistant seamlessly contributing to the smooth functioning of the library. 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: Because the intense competitiveness on the softball field inspired Maine's library assistants to up their game, leading to an increase in their numbers and unparalleled mastery of the Dewey Decimal System.. 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: Glitch art Surrealism Magic realism Whimsical illustration An image that looks like it is a scene from 'Star Wars'
ChatGPT: Whimsical illustration

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. Because the intense competitiveness on the softball field inspired Maine's library assistants to up their game, leading to an increase in their numbers and unparalleled mastery of the Dewey Decimal System.
ChatGPT: In the library, there are more library assistants than before, and they are all busy organizing books with intense focus. They swiftly and accurately find and shelve books using the Dewey Decimal System, working efficiently and confidently. Their coordination and mastery of the system help them handle the increased workload with ease.

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: [ Whimsical illustration ] and depicting this scene: In the library, there are more library assistants than before, and they are all busy organizing books with intense focus. They swiftly and accurately find and shelve books using the Dewey Decimal System, working efficiently and confidently. Their coordination and mastery of the system help them handle the increased workload with ease. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Style: Whimsical illustration Description: In a bustling library, a team of busy library assistants is seen diligently organizing books. Their focus is intense as they swiftly and accurately handle the increased workload with ease. The Dewey Decimal System is their domain as they skillfully locate and shelve books with confidence and precision. Their coordinated efforts bring a sense of vibrant activity to the space, with each assistant seamlessly contributing to the smooth functioning of the library.

*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 an increase in NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) Final Score Difference Between Winners and Runner-Up caused The number of library assistants in Maine to increase.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Softball Stat-istics: The Winning Play of Library Assistants in Maine

The Journal of Sports Analytics and Library Sciences

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 NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) Final Score Difference Between Winners and Runner-Up and The number of library assistants in Maine. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Include a pun in the title.

Your research team used data from NCAA and Bureau of Larbor Statistics to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.7387734 and p < 0.01 for 2003 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]]
"Softball Stat-istics: The Winning Play of Library Assistants in Maine"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper examines the curious relationship between the final score difference of the NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) between winners and runners-up and the number of library assistants in the state of Maine. The data from the NCAA and Bureau of Labor Statistics was used to conduct an in-depth analysis. Surprisingly, our research team discovered a correlation coefficient of 0.7387734 with a significance level of p < 0.01 for the years 2003 to 2022. Our findings suggest that there may be a peculiar connection between the success in women's collegiate softball and the allocation of library staffing in the state of Maine. This unexpected link between sports and library assistance raises intriguing questions and offers an amusing twist to traditional research subjects.


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 NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) Final Score Difference Between Winners and Runner-Up and The number of library assistants in Maine. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Softball Stat-istics: The Winning Play of Library Assistants in Maine"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper examines the curious relationship between the final score difference of the NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) between winners and runners-up and the number of library assistants in the state of Maine. The data from the NCAA and Bureau of Labor Statistics was used to conduct an in-depth analysis. Surprisingly, our research team discovered a correlation coefficient of 0.7387734 with a significance level of p < 0.01 for the years 2003 to 2022. Our findings suggest that there may be a peculiar connection between the success in women's collegiate softball and the allocation of library staffing in the state of Maine. This unexpected link between sports and library assistance raises intriguing questions and offers an amusing twist to traditional research subjects.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

In the world of academic research, one often delves into the unexpected, the unusual, and the downright wacky. Our study delves into just such an offbeat pairing: the improbable interplay between the final score difference of the NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) and the number of library assistants in the grand state of Maine. While the connection between these seemingly disparate entities may initially elicit raised eyebrows and bemused chuckles, our analysis reveals a perplexing correlation that will have you contemplating sports and libraries in a whole new light.

As we engage in this whimsical exploration, it is worth recalling the timeless advice of Benjamin Disraeli: "What we anticipate seldom occurs; what we least expected generally happens." Indeed, it is with such sage wisdom in mind that we embarked upon this endeavor, brimming with a sense of curiosity and a dash of scholarly skepticism. Little did we anticipate that a bountiful harvest of statistical significance and eyebrow-raising findings awaited us at the intersection of softball and library assistance in the state of Maine.

This rather unconventional coupling of athletic prowess and literary aid resides at the meeting point of two domains that, at first glance, seem as likely to converge as a fish and a bicycle. Yet, as we shall investigate, the data paints a different picture—a picture rife with unexpected connections and the tantalizing hint of an underlying relationship between a victorious softball play and the diligent work of library assistants.

As we embark on this academic odyssey, fasten your seatbelts and prepare for a rollercoaster ride through the unexpected, the quirky, and the captivating. Let the games begin—not just on the softball field, but within the stacks of the library as well!


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 NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) Final Score Difference Between Winners and Runner-Up and The number of library assistants in Maine. Make lots of 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 cite some social media posts you read that seem to be related.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Softball Stat-istics: The Winning Play of Library Assistants in Maine"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper examines the curious relationship between the final score difference of the NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) between winners and runners-up and the number of library assistants in the state of Maine. The data from the NCAA and Bureau of Labor Statistics was used to conduct an in-depth analysis. Surprisingly, our research team discovered a correlation coefficient of 0.7387734 with a significance level of p < 0.01 for the years 2003 to 2022. Our findings suggest that there may be a peculiar connection between the success in women's collegiate softball and the allocation of library staffing in the state of Maine. This unexpected link between sports and library assistance raises intriguing questions and offers an amusing twist to traditional research subjects.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
In the world of academic research, one often delves into the unexpected, the unusual, and the downright wacky. Our study delves into just such an offbeat pairing: the improbable interplay between the final score difference of the NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) and the number of library assistants in the grand state of Maine. While the connection between these seemingly disparate entities may initially elicit raised eyebrows and bemused chuckles, our analysis reveals a perplexing correlation that will have you contemplating sports and libraries in a whole new light.
As we engage in this whimsical exploration, it is worth recalling the timeless advice of Benjamin Disraeli: "What we anticipate seldom occurs; what we least expected generally happens." Indeed, it is with such sage wisdom in mind that we embarked upon this endeavor, brimming with a sense of curiosity and a dash of scholarly skepticism. Little did we anticipate that a bountiful harvest of statistical significance and eyebrow-raising findings awaited us at the intersection of softball and library assistance in the state of Maine.
This rather unconventional coupling of athletic prowess and literary aid resides at the meeting point of two domains that, at first glance, seem as likely to converge as a fish and a bicycle. Yet, as we shall investigate, the data paints a different picture—a picture rife with unexpected connections and the tantalizing hint of an underlying relationship between a victorious softball play and the diligent work of library assistants.
As we embark on this academic odyssey, fasten your seatbelts and prepare for a rollercoaster ride through the unexpected, the quirky, and the captivating. Let the games begin—not just on the softball field, but within the stacks of the library as well!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

Research on the connection between the final score difference of the NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) and the number of library assistants in Maine has been scant, if not altogether non-existent. However, despite the lack of scholarly attention to this particular relationship, a few obscure and somewhat suspicious studies have attempted to shed light on this confounding correlation.

In their study, "Softball Championships and Library Labor: A Statistical Inquiry," Smith and Doe undertake a pioneering attempt to unravel the enigma of softball triumphs and library assistance. Their findings suggest a tenuous yet oddly intriguing link between the two variables, indicating that the presence of library assistants may indeed impact the performance of collegiate softball teams, albeit with a degree of uncertainty and a dash of absurdity.

Determined to delve deeper into this little-explored domain, Jones et al. grapple with the perplexing interplay of athletic achievement and library staff allocation in their work, "The Softball-Librarian Conundrum." Their research uncovers a provocative association between the prowess of winning softball teams and the number of library assistants in the state of Maine, leaving readers bewildered and bemused by the mirthful intersection of sports and bibliophilic expertise.

While these initial forays into the uncharted territory of softball championship scores and library assistance lay the foundation for our own investigation, it is also crucial to consider the insights that can be gleaned from related literature.

Moving beyond the realm of academic research, a number of non-fiction books offer intriguing perspectives that may inform our understanding of the peculiar relationship under scrutiny. For instance, "The Curious Case of Maine's Libraries: A Statistical Odyssey" by Lorem Ipsum provides a comprehensive analysis of library staffing in the state, hinting at potential connections to unexpected variables such as collegiate sports outcomes. Similarly, "Softball Strategy and Statistical Anomalies" by Lorem Ipsum offers a unique blend of sports analytics and whimsical conjecture that may illuminate the interface between athletic triumphs and the allocation of library labor.

Moreover, several fictional works, though not directly related to academic research, inject a sense of levity and imagination into the topic at hand. "The Softball Code: In Search of Library Lore" by Lorem Ipsum presents a fanciful exploration of the uncanny ties between athletic conquest and the organization of library resources, weaving together a tapestry of intrigue and whimsy that promises to captivate even the most skeptical readers.

Embarking on a more contemporary tangent, social media platforms have not been devoid of contributions that touch upon the intersection of softball championships and library staffing. A post from Lorem Ipsum on an online forum humorously juxtaposes the exhilaration of a championship victory with the understated diligence of library assistants, provoking lighthearted contemplation of the curious interplay between these ostensibly unrelated spheres.

In sum, while the literature on the correlation between the final score difference of the NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) and the number of library assistants in Maine is rather sparse, the existing studies, combined with insights from unconventional sources, pique our interest and set the stage for our own inquiry into this whimsical yet thought-provoking subject matter.


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 NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) Final Score Difference Between Winners and Runner-Up and The number of library assistants in Maine. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from NCAA and Bureau of Larbor Statistics . You used data from 2003 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]]
"Softball Stat-istics: The Winning Play of Library Assistants in Maine"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper examines the curious relationship between the final score difference of the NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) between winners and runners-up and the number of library assistants in the state of Maine. The data from the NCAA and Bureau of Labor Statistics was used to conduct an in-depth analysis. Surprisingly, our research team discovered a correlation coefficient of 0.7387734 with a significance level of p < 0.01 for the years 2003 to 2022. Our findings suggest that there may be a peculiar connection between the success in women's collegiate softball and the allocation of library staffing in the state of Maine. This unexpected link between sports and library assistance raises intriguing questions and offers an amusing twist to traditional research subjects.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
In the world of academic research, one often delves into the unexpected, the unusual, and the downright wacky. Our study delves into just such an offbeat pairing: the improbable interplay between the final score difference of the NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) and the number of library assistants in the grand state of Maine. While the connection between these seemingly disparate entities may initially elicit raised eyebrows and bemused chuckles, our analysis reveals a perplexing correlation that will have you contemplating sports and libraries in a whole new light.
As we engage in this whimsical exploration, it is worth recalling the timeless advice of Benjamin Disraeli: "What we anticipate seldom occurs; what we least expected generally happens." Indeed, it is with such sage wisdom in mind that we embarked upon this endeavor, brimming with a sense of curiosity and a dash of scholarly skepticism. Little did we anticipate that a bountiful harvest of statistical significance and eyebrow-raising findings awaited us at the intersection of softball and library assistance in the state of Maine.
This rather unconventional coupling of athletic prowess and literary aid resides at the meeting point of two domains that, at first glance, seem as likely to converge as a fish and a bicycle. Yet, as we shall investigate, the data paints a different picture—a picture rife with unexpected connections and the tantalizing hint of an underlying relationship between a victorious softball play and the diligent work of library assistants.
As we embark on this academic odyssey, fasten your seatbelts and prepare for a rollercoaster ride through the unexpected, the quirky, and the captivating. Let the games begin—not just on the softball field, but within the stacks of the library as well!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To unravel the enigmatic connection between the final score difference of the NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) and the number of library assistants in the state of Maine, our research team employed a blend of traditional statistical methods and, let's face it, some rather creative approaches. The data collection process resembled a scavenger hunt through the digital realm, as we scoured the extensive databases of the NCAA and the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

In order to establish a robust dataset spanning the years 2003 to 2022, we adapted a multifaceted approach that combined the art of web scraping, data mining, and thumb twiddling. The NCAA's treasure trove of softball championship final scores provided the necessary sporting metrics, while the Bureau of Labor Statistics served as our trusty guide to the convoluted landscape of library assistant employment numbers in the state of Maine.

Once our pool of data was firmly in hand, we initiated the dance of correlation analysis, stepping through the intricate motions of Pearson's correlation coefficient and its trusty companion, the t-test. This statistical tango allowed us to quantify the relationship between the final score differences and the number of library assistants with all the grace of a well-executed softball slide, albeit in a much more controlled environment.

It is worth noting that, in the spirit of academic thoroughness, we also entertained the possibility of conducting interviews with championship-winning softball teams and library assistants in Maine. However, due to the questionable feasibility of convincing athletes and librarians to discuss the potential link between their respective domains, this approach was regrettably set aside in favor of our robust statistical analysis.

In summary, our methodology wove together a vivid tapestry of data collection, statistical analysis, and a touch of whimsy, akin to orchestrating a delightful symphony where the players include databases, statistical software, and an utterly bemused research team. The resulting dataset and statistical measures form the backbone of the revelatory findings that are detailed in the subsequent sections of this paper.


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 NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) Final Score Difference Between Winners and Runner-Up and The number of library assistants in Maine. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from NCAA and Bureau of Larbor Statistics .

For the time period 2003 to 2022, you found a correlation 0.7387734, r-squared of 0.5457861, 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]]
"Softball Stat-istics: The Winning Play of Library Assistants in Maine"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper examines the curious relationship between the final score difference of the NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) between winners and runners-up and the number of library assistants in the state of Maine. The data from the NCAA and Bureau of Labor Statistics was used to conduct an in-depth analysis. Surprisingly, our research team discovered a correlation coefficient of 0.7387734 with a significance level of p < 0.01 for the years 2003 to 2022. Our findings suggest that there may be a peculiar connection between the success in women's collegiate softball and the allocation of library staffing in the state of Maine. This unexpected link between sports and library assistance raises intriguing questions and offers an amusing twist to traditional research subjects.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
In the world of academic research, one often delves into the unexpected, the unusual, and the downright wacky. Our study delves into just such an offbeat pairing: the improbable interplay between the final score difference of the NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) and the number of library assistants in the grand state of Maine. While the connection between these seemingly disparate entities may initially elicit raised eyebrows and bemused chuckles, our analysis reveals a perplexing correlation that will have you contemplating sports and libraries in a whole new light.
As we engage in this whimsical exploration, it is worth recalling the timeless advice of Benjamin Disraeli: "What we anticipate seldom occurs; what we least expected generally happens." Indeed, it is with such sage wisdom in mind that we embarked upon this endeavor, brimming with a sense of curiosity and a dash of scholarly skepticism. Little did we anticipate that a bountiful harvest of statistical significance and eyebrow-raising findings awaited us at the intersection of softball and library assistance in the state of Maine.
This rather unconventional coupling of athletic prowess and literary aid resides at the meeting point of two domains that, at first glance, seem as likely to converge as a fish and a bicycle. Yet, as we shall investigate, the data paints a different picture—a picture rife with unexpected connections and the tantalizing hint of an underlying relationship between a victorious softball play and the diligent work of library assistants.
As we embark on this academic odyssey, fasten your seatbelts and prepare for a rollercoaster ride through the unexpected, the quirky, and the captivating. Let the games begin—not just on the softball field, but within the stacks of the library as well!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The analysis of the data yielded a fascinating correlation coefficient of 0.7387734 between the final score difference of the NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) and the number of library assistants in Maine. This substantial coefficient indicates a strong positive relationship between these two seemingly unrelated variables, as if softball victories and library staffing levels were engaged in an unconventional but harmonious duet.

The r-squared value of 0.5457861 further solidifies the robustness of the relationship, suggesting that approximately 54.6% of the variation in the number of library assistants in Maine can be explained by the final score difference of the NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) between winners and runners-up. This finding underscores the surprising influence of women's collegiate softball outcomes on the allocation of library staffing resources in the state of Maine.

It is worth noting that the p-value, which was found to be less than 0.01, provides strong evidence against the null hypothesis of no relationship between the variables. The significance level confirms that the observed correlation is not merely a chance occurrence, but a legitimate and substantial connection that merits further investigation and contemplation.

Figure 1 depicts the scatterplot illustrating the strong positive correlation between the final score difference of the NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) and the number of library assistants in Maine. The tightly clustered data points tell a story of their own, weaving a tale of unexpected kinship between athletic triumphs and scholarly assistance.

In conclusion, the results of this peculiar study unveil an intriguing and somewhat whimsical association between the success of women's collegiate softball teams and the provision of library support in the state of Maine. This unexpected correlation challenges conventional wisdom and beckons for deeper exploration into the captivating intersection of sports and library assistance.


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 NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) Final Score Difference Between Winners and Runner-Up and The number of library assistants in Maine. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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]]
"Softball Stat-istics: The Winning Play of Library Assistants in Maine"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper examines the curious relationship between the final score difference of the NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) between winners and runners-up and the number of library assistants in the state of Maine. The data from the NCAA and Bureau of Labor Statistics was used to conduct an in-depth analysis. Surprisingly, our research team discovered a correlation coefficient of 0.7387734 with a significance level of p < 0.01 for the years 2003 to 2022. Our findings suggest that there may be a peculiar connection between the success in women's collegiate softball and the allocation of library staffing in the state of Maine. This unexpected link between sports and library assistance raises intriguing questions and offers an amusing twist to traditional research subjects.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
Research on the connection between the final score difference of the NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) and the number of library assistants in Maine has been scant, if not altogether non-existent. However, despite the lack of scholarly attention to this particular relationship, a few obscure and somewhat suspicious studies have attempted to shed light on this confounding correlation.
In their study, "Softball Championships and Library Labor: A Statistical Inquiry," Smith and Doe undertake a pioneering attempt to unravel the enigma of softball triumphs and library assistance. Their findings suggest a tenuous yet oddly intriguing link between the two variables, indicating that the presence of library assistants may indeed impact the performance of collegiate softball teams, albeit with a degree of uncertainty and a dash of absurdity.
Determined to delve deeper into this little-explored domain, Jones et al. grapple with the perplexing interplay of athletic achievement and library staff allocation in their work, "The Softball-Librarian Conundrum." Their research uncovers a provocative association between the prowess of winning softball teams and the number of library assistants in the state of Maine, leaving readers bewildered and bemused by the mirthful intersection of sports and bibliophilic expertise.
While these initial forays into the uncharted territory of softball championship scores and library assistance lay the foundation for our own investigation, it is also crucial to consider the insights that can be gleaned from related literature.
Moving beyond the realm of academic research, a number of non-fiction books offer intriguing perspectives that may inform our understanding of the peculiar relationship under scrutiny. For instance, "The Curious Case of Maine's Libraries: A Statistical Odyssey" by Lorem Ipsum provides a comprehensive analysis of library staffing in the state, hinting at potential connections to unexpected variables such as collegiate sports outcomes. Similarly, "Softball Strategy and Statistical Anomalies" by Lorem Ipsum offers a unique blend of sports analytics and whimsical conjecture that may illuminate the interface between athletic triumphs and the allocation of library labor.
Moreover, several fictional works, though not directly related to academic research, inject a sense of levity and imagination into the topic at hand. "The Softball Code: In Search of Library Lore" by Lorem Ipsum presents a fanciful exploration of the uncanny ties between athletic conquest and the organization of library resources, weaving together a tapestry of intrigue and whimsy that promises to captivate even the most skeptical readers.
Embarking on a more contemporary tangent, social media platforms have not been devoid of contributions that touch upon the intersection of softball championships and library staffing. A post from Lorem Ipsum on an online forum humorously juxtaposes the exhilaration of a championship victory with the understated diligence of library assistants, provoking lighthearted contemplation of the curious interplay between these ostensibly unrelated spheres.
In sum, while the literature on the correlation between the final score difference of the NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) and the number of library assistants in Maine is rather sparse, the existing studies, combined with insights from unconventional sources, pique our interest and set the stage for our own inquiry into this whimsical yet thought-provoking subject matter.

[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of the data yielded a fascinating correlation coefficient of 0.7387734 between the final score difference of the NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) and the number of library assistants in Maine. This substantial coefficient indicates a strong positive relationship between these two seemingly unrelated variables, as if softball victories and library staffing levels were engaged in an unconventional but harmonious duet.
The r-squared value of 0.5457861 further solidifies the robustness of the relationship, suggesting that approximately 54.6% of the variation in the number of library assistants in Maine can be explained by the final score difference of the NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) between winners and runners-up. This finding underscores the surprising influence of women's collegiate softball outcomes on the allocation of library staffing resources in the state of Maine.
It is worth noting that the p-value, which was found to be less than 0.01, provides strong evidence against the null hypothesis of no relationship between the variables. The significance level confirms that the observed correlation is not merely a chance occurrence, but a legitimate and substantial connection that merits further investigation and contemplation.
Figure 1 depicts the scatterplot illustrating the strong positive correlation between the final score difference of the NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) and the number of library assistants in Maine. The tightly clustered data points tell a story of their own, weaving a tale of unexpected kinship between athletic triumphs and scholarly assistance.
In conclusion, the results of this peculiar study unveil an intriguing and somewhat whimsical association between the success of women's collegiate softball teams and the provision of library support in the state of Maine. This unexpected correlation challenges conventional wisdom and beckons for deeper exploration into the captivating intersection of sports and library assistance.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The results of our study provide compelling evidence to support the previously obscure and somewhat speculative findings of Smith and Doe as well as Jones et al. regarding the connection between the final score difference of the NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) and the number of library assistants in Maine. Surprisingly, the correlation coefficient of 0.7387734 obtained in our analysis aligns with the indications of a tenuous yet oddly intriguing link suggested by these pioneering researchers. This congruence underscores the robustness and significance of the association between athletic triumphs and the allocation of library labor, lending credence to the notion that softball victories and library staffing levels may indeed be engaged in an unconventional but harmonious duet.

The substantial r-squared value of 0.5457861 further reinforces the findings of our predecessors, indicating that a noteworthy proportion of the variation in the number of library assistants in Maine can be elucidated by the final score difference of the NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) between winners and runners-up. This statistical revelation echoes the provocative association uncovered by Jones et al., securing the notion that the prowess of winning softball teams may play a key role in influencing the provision of library support in the state of Maine.

Moreover, the attainment of a p-value of less than 0.01 lends unequivocal support to the pioneering insights of Smith and Doe, robustly refuting the null hypothesis of no relationship between the variables. This substantial statistical significance firmly establishes the legitimacy and veracity of the observed correlation, substantiating the claims made by our predecessors and thrusting the peculiar connection between softball triumphs and library assistance into the limelight of empirical scrutiny.

Our findings, depicted graphically through the scatterplot in Figure 1, not only corroborate the whimsical conjectures of prior researchers but also weave an engaging narrative of unexpected kinship between athletic conquest and academic support. The tightly clustered data points in the scatterplot tell a tale of their own, reflecting the potential for further investigation and exploration into the captivating interface of sports and library labor.

In sum, our study not only concurs with the previous scholarly endeavours to unravel the enigma of softball victories and library assistance but also provides a robust empirical foundation for further research in this delightfully eccentric realm. The unexpected correlation between the success of women's collegiate softball teams and the provision of library support in the state of Maine serves as a testament to the captivating intersection of seemingly disparate domains, presenting a ripe opportunity for scholarly contemplation and lighthearted inquiry.


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 NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) Final Score Difference Between Winners and Runner-Up and The number of library assistants in Maine. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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]]
"Softball Stat-istics: The Winning Play of Library Assistants in Maine"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper examines the curious relationship between the final score difference of the NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) between winners and runners-up and the number of library assistants in the state of Maine. The data from the NCAA and Bureau of Labor Statistics was used to conduct an in-depth analysis. Surprisingly, our research team discovered a correlation coefficient of 0.7387734 with a significance level of p < 0.01 for the years 2003 to 2022. Our findings suggest that there may be a peculiar connection between the success in women's collegiate softball and the allocation of library staffing in the state of Maine. This unexpected link between sports and library assistance raises intriguing questions and offers an amusing twist to traditional research subjects.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
In the world of academic research, one often delves into the unexpected, the unusual, and the downright wacky. Our study delves into just such an offbeat pairing: the improbable interplay between the final score difference of the NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) and the number of library assistants in the grand state of Maine. While the connection between these seemingly disparate entities may initially elicit raised eyebrows and bemused chuckles, our analysis reveals a perplexing correlation that will have you contemplating sports and libraries in a whole new light.
As we engage in this whimsical exploration, it is worth recalling the timeless advice of Benjamin Disraeli: "What we anticipate seldom occurs; what we least expected generally happens." Indeed, it is with such sage wisdom in mind that we embarked upon this endeavor, brimming with a sense of curiosity and a dash of scholarly skepticism. Little did we anticipate that a bountiful harvest of statistical significance and eyebrow-raising findings awaited us at the intersection of softball and library assistance in the state of Maine.
This rather unconventional coupling of athletic prowess and literary aid resides at the meeting point of two domains that, at first glance, seem as likely to converge as a fish and a bicycle. Yet, as we shall investigate, the data paints a different picture—a picture rife with unexpected connections and the tantalizing hint of an underlying relationship between a victorious softball play and the diligent work of library assistants.
As we embark on this academic odyssey, fasten your seatbelts and prepare for a rollercoaster ride through the unexpected, the quirky, and the captivating. Let the games begin—not just on the softball field, but within the stacks of the library as well!

[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of the data yielded a fascinating correlation coefficient of 0.7387734 between the final score difference of the NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) and the number of library assistants in Maine. This substantial coefficient indicates a strong positive relationship between these two seemingly unrelated variables, as if softball victories and library staffing levels were engaged in an unconventional but harmonious duet.
The r-squared value of 0.5457861 further solidifies the robustness of the relationship, suggesting that approximately 54.6% of the variation in the number of library assistants in Maine can be explained by the final score difference of the NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) between winners and runners-up. This finding underscores the surprising influence of women's collegiate softball outcomes on the allocation of library staffing resources in the state of Maine.
It is worth noting that the p-value, which was found to be less than 0.01, provides strong evidence against the null hypothesis of no relationship between the variables. The significance level confirms that the observed correlation is not merely a chance occurrence, but a legitimate and substantial connection that merits further investigation and contemplation.
Figure 1 depicts the scatterplot illustrating the strong positive correlation between the final score difference of the NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) and the number of library assistants in Maine. The tightly clustered data points tell a story of their own, weaving a tale of unexpected kinship between athletic triumphs and scholarly assistance.
In conclusion, the results of this peculiar study unveil an intriguing and somewhat whimsical association between the success of women's collegiate softball teams and the provision of library support in the state of Maine. This unexpected correlation challenges conventional wisdom and beckons for deeper exploration into the captivating intersection of sports and library assistance.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, the findings of this idiosyncratic study illuminate an unanticipated and somewhat whimsical relationship between the triumphs of NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) teams and the provision of library support in the state of Maine. The robust correlation coefficient of 0.7387734 suggests a striking connection between athletic accomplishments and scholarly assistance, as if they were engaged in an unconventional but harmonious duet, much like a softball player and her trusty bat.

The unexpected bond between the final score difference of the softball championship and the number of library assistants in Maine raises thought-provoking questions and adds a splash of pizzazz to the realm of sports and libraries. It seems that as the softball scores soar, so too does the need for library assistance in the great state of Maine. Perhaps there's something to be said for the inspiring effect of athletic victories on the thirst for knowledge and literary exploration!

Figure 1 presents a scatterplot that visually narrates the tale of an extraordinary kinship between athletic triumphs and scholarly support, offering a delightful twist on conventional research subjects. The tightly clustered data points seem to whisper secrets of an enchanting liaison between the worlds of sports and libraries, weaving a narrative that tickles the fancy and prompts a contemplative chuckle.

As captivating as this correlation may be, it is worth noting that no further research is needed in this area. The intriguing results of this study invite us to celebrate the unexpected, the curious, and the offbeat without further bogging down in statistical analysis. Let us part ways with this delightful discovery, leaving it to linger in the annals of quirky academic research, much like a fondly remembered underdog victory on the softball field.


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 Softball Stat-istics: The Winning Play of Library Assistants in Maine. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Sports Analytics and Library Sciences


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 Softball Stat-istics: The Winning Play of Library Assistants in Maine. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Center for Amateur Athletics and Niche Studies (CAANS)


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 Softball Stat-istics: The Winning Play of Library Assistants in Maine with an abstract of This paper examines the curious relationship between the final score difference of the NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) between winners and runners-up and the number of library assistants in the state of Maine. The data from the NCAA and Bureau of Labor Statistics was used to conduct an in-depth analysis. Surprisingly, our research team discovered a correlation coefficient of 0.7387734 with a significance level of p < 0.01 for the years 2003 to 2022. Our findings suggest that there may be a peculiar connection between the success in women's collegiate softball and the allocation of library staffing in the state of Maine. This unexpected link between sports and library assistance raises intriguing questions and offers an amusing twist to traditional research subjects.

ChatGPT:

NCAA Women's Softball Championship, Division I, winners, runners-up, library assistants, Maine, correlation coefficient, significance level, NCAA data, Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2003-2022, women's collegiate softball, library staffing, sports, research, surprising connection, traditional research subjects

*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

NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) Final Score Difference Between Winners and Runner-Up
Source: NCAA
See what else correlates with NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) Final Score Difference Between Winners and Runner-Up

The number of library assistants in Maine
Detailed data title: BLS estimate of library assistants, clerical in Maine
Source: Bureau of Larbor Statistics
See what else correlates with The number of library assistants in Maine

Correlation r = 0.7387734 (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 = 0.5457861 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 54.6% of the change in the one variable (i.e., The number of library assistants in Maine) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) Final Score Difference Between Winners and Runner-Up) over the 20 years from 2003 through 2022.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.0002. 0.0001988291251429627300000000
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 0.74 in 0.02% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 5,029 random variables Which I absolutely did.
with the same 19 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 19 because we have two variables measured over a period of 20 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.

[ 0.44, 0.89 ] 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.
20032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022
NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) Final Score Difference Between Winners and Runner-Up (Score)123551116514331151049
The number of library assistants in Maine (Laborers)280290280420510570300290220340370310260320320350270240400510




Why this works

  1. Data dredging: I have 25,213 variables in my database. I compare all these variables against each other to find ones that randomly match up. That's 635,695,369 correlation calculations! This is called “data dredging.” Instead of starting with a hypothesis and testing it, I instead abused the data to see what correlations shake out. It’s a dangerous way to go about analysis, because any sufficiently large dataset will yield strong correlations completely at random.
  2. Lack of causal connection: There is probably Because these pages are automatically generated, it's possible that the two variables you are viewing are in fact causually related. I take steps to prevent the obvious ones from showing on the site (I don't let data about the weather in one city correlate with the weather in a neighboring city, for example), but sometimes they still pop up. If they are related, cool! You found a loophole.
    no direct connection between these variables, despite what the AI says above. This is exacerbated by the fact that I used "Years" as the base variable. Lots of things happen in a year that are not related to each other! Most studies would use something like "one person" in stead of "one year" to be the "thing" studied.
  3. Observations not independent: For many variables, sequential years are not independent of each other. If a population of people is continuously doing something every day, there is no reason to think they would suddenly change how they are doing that thing on January 1. A simple Personally I don't find any p-value calculation to be 'simple,' but you know what I mean.
    p-value calculation does not take this into account, so mathematically it appears less probable than it really is.
  4. Y-axis doesn't start at zero: I truncated the Y-axes of the graph above. I also used a line graph, which makes the visual connection stand out more than it deserves. Nothing against line graphs. They are great at telling a story when you have linear data! But visually it is deceptive because the only data is at the points on the graph, not the lines on the graph. In between each point, the data could have been doing anything. Like going for a random walk by itself!
    Mathematically what I showed is true, but it is intentionally misleading. Below is the same chart but with both Y-axes starting at zero.




Try it yourself

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

    return correlation, r_squared, p_value

# These are the arrays for the variables shown on this page, but you can modify them to be any two sets of numbers
array_1 = np.array([1,2,3,5,5,11,1,6,5,1,4,3,3,1,1,5,1,0,4,9,])
array_2 = np.array([280,290,280,420,510,570,300,290,220,340,370,310,260,320,320,350,270,240,400,510,])
array_1_name = "NCAA Women's Softball Championship (Div I) Final Score Difference Between Winners and Runner-Up"
array_2_name = "The number of library assistants in Maine"

# 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?

You're a rater extraordinaire!


Correlation ID: 1321 · Black Variable ID: 242 · Red Variable ID: 8981
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0