about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #1,487 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is GMO use in corn grown in Missouri and the second variable is Organic Food Sales Volume in the United States.  The chart goes from 2000 to 2012, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

The GMO corn in Missouri developed a strong affinity for organic produce, and as it communicated with other crops, it inadvertently created a nationwide craving for all things organic. It's like the corn became the ultimate organic hype-man, leading to a chain reaction of people clamoring for pesticide-free, non-GMO goodness. Who knew that the key to boosting organic food sales lay in genetically modified corn spreading the word, one kernel at a time!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: [ A photo-realistic image ] A serene Missouri cornfield stretches into the distance, bathed in warm sunlight. A farmer in traditional overalls walks along the neatly arranged rows of tall, green cornstalks. Some of the corn plants prominently bear labels that read "GMO," standing out against the natural backdrop. In the background, a vibrant farmer's market bustles with activity as people browse the stalls filled with an array of colorful organic fruits and vegetables. The contrast between the meticulous agricultural landscape and the lively market creates a striking dichotomy. The depiction should include only scenes, people, and objects, it should not include text or speech bubbles.
This image generation prompt was also generated by AI, using the following sequence:

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You select one of a few potential scene descriptors that seems to go along with the variables described. You respond only with the scene descriptions provided and say nothing else.
User prompt: Here are two variables: GMO use in corn grown in Missouri and Organic Food Sales Volume in the United States. Given these, which of the following image style descriptions seems most appropriate? Pick the one that seems to be related to one of the variables at hand. Please respond with only one of the following potential descriptions: Macabre Surrealism Art nouveau A photo-realistic image Glitch art
ChatGPT: A photo-realistic image

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You describe simple visual scenes that depict the two variables stated. You combine both variables into one scene.
User prompt: Please describe a visual scene that prominently depicts both GMO use in corn grown in Missouri and Organic Food Sales Volume in the United States together. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a Missouri cornfield, a farmer is inspecting rows of tall cornstalks. Some of the corn has labels saying "GMO," while nearby, a bustling farmer's market is filled with people buying organic fruits and vegetables.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You write and improve image generation prompts for DALLE-3. You maintain the same subjects, but enhance the visuals.
User prompt: Please respond with an image generation prompt that would be likely to create an interesting visual using DALLE-3, using the following style: [ A photo-realistic image ] and depicting this scene: In a Missouri cornfield, a farmer is inspecting rows of tall cornstalks. Some of the corn has labels saying "GMO," while nearby, a bustling farmer's market is filled with people buying organic fruits and vegetables. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: [ A photo-realistic image ] A serene Missouri cornfield stretches into the distance, bathed in warm sunlight. A farmer in traditional overalls walks along the neatly arranged rows of tall, green cornstalks. Some of the corn plants prominently bear labels that read "GMO," standing out against the natural backdrop. In the background, a vibrant farmer's market bustles with activity as people browse the stalls filled with an array of colorful organic fruits and vegetables. The contrast between the meticulous agricultural landscape and the lively market creates a striking dichotomy.

*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 GMO use in corn grown in Missouri caused Organic Food Sales Volume in the United States to increase.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
The Corn-GMO Storm: A Maize-ing Connection to Organic Sales Volume

The Journal of Agri-Science Innovation and Sustainability

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 witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics 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 GMO use in corn grown in Missouri and Organic Food Sales Volume in the United States. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Rhyme words in the title.

Your research team used data from USDA and Statista to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9438119 and p < 0.01 for 2000 to 2012.

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

[[TITLE]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit

[[ABSTRACT]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit



ChatGPT:
[[TITLE]]
The Corn-GMO Storm: A Maize-ing Connection to Organic Sales Volume

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research delves into the deliciously intriguing relationship between the utilization of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in the corn fields of Missouri and the voluminous sales of organic food across the United States. With a kernel of curiosity, we utilized data from the USDA and Statista to scrutinize this agrarian enigma. Our findings unveil a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9438119, with a p-value less than 0.01 for the time period of 2000 to 2012. This cornundrum has us pondering the corncerns of GMO skeptics and organic enthusiasts alike, reaping kernels of knowledge and food for thought. Our examination of this correlation peels back the layers of agri-culture and invites further exploration into the intertwined world of genetically modified corn and organic food sales.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics 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 GMO use in corn grown in Missouri and Organic Food Sales Volume in the United States. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
The Corn-GMO Storm: A Maize-ing Connection to Organic Sales Volume

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research delves into the deliciously intriguing relationship between the utilization of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in the corn fields of Missouri and the voluminous sales of organic food across the United States. With a kernel of curiosity, we utilized data from the USDA and Statista to scrutinize this agrarian enigma. Our findings unveil a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9438119, with a p-value less than 0.01 for the time period of 2000 to 2012. This cornundrum has us pondering the corncerns of GMO skeptics and organic enthusiasts alike, reaping kernels of knowledge and food for thought. Our examination of this correlation peels back the layers of agri-culture and invites further exploration into the intertwined world of genetically modified corn and organic food sales.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

Corn, also known as maize (or should we say, "maize-ing"), stands as one of the most important crops in the United States, not only for its pivotal role in agriculture but also for its versatility as a food staple, an industrial product, and even a source of entertainment during summer barbecues. The introduction of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) into the cultivation of corn has sparked extensive debate and controversy, garnering attention from both the scientific community and the general public. Meanwhile, the organic food market has experienced significant growth, with consumers showing a growing appetite for foodstuffs that are, quite literally, "unmodified." Against this backdrop, it is essential to explore the interplay between GMO use in corn and the demand for organic foods.

The aim of this paper is to uncover the connections between the utilization of GMOs in the corn fields of Missouri and the sales volume of organic food across the United States. This investigation presents an opportunity to not only examine the statistical correlation between these two seemingly disparate realms, but also to peel back the husk, so to speak, on the intricate dynamics of the agricultural market. By shedding light on this intriguing relationship, we hope to spur further examination and stimulate discussions that go beyond the usual "stalk" of academic discourse.

At the heart of our inquiry lies the question: Do the surreptitious tendrils of GMOs—forged through advanced science and technology—impact the flourishing growth of organic food industry? Through the implementation of rigorous statistical analysis and comprehensive data investigation, we aim to unearth the core of this "cornundrum" and to cultivate a greater understanding of how these developments shape the agricultural landscape of the United States.

So, let us embark on this maize-ing journey into the world of corn, GMOs, and organic food sales, armed with the tools of statistical analysis and a healthy sense of humor. The time has come to harvest a bounty of knowledge from the field of agricultural economics, sow the seeds of understanding, and reap a cornucopia of insight into this intriguing correlation.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics 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 GMO use in corn grown in Missouri and Organic Food Sales Volume in the United States. 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 name some movies that you watched that are tangentially related to the topic.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
The Corn-GMO Storm: A Maize-ing Connection to Organic Sales Volume

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research delves into the deliciously intriguing relationship between the utilization of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in the corn fields of Missouri and the voluminous sales of organic food across the United States. With a kernel of curiosity, we utilized data from the USDA and Statista to scrutinize this agrarian enigma. Our findings unveil a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9438119, with a p-value less than 0.01 for the time period of 2000 to 2012. This cornundrum has us pondering the corncerns of GMO skeptics and organic enthusiasts alike, reaping kernels of knowledge and food for thought. Our examination of this correlation peels back the layers of agri-culture and invites further exploration into the intertwined world of genetically modified corn and organic food sales.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
Corn, also known as maize (or should we say, "maize-ing"), stands as one of the most important crops in the United States, not only for its pivotal role in agriculture but also for its versatility as a food staple, an industrial product, and even a source of entertainment during summer barbecues. The introduction of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) into the cultivation of corn has sparked extensive debate and controversy, garnering attention from both the scientific community and the general public. Meanwhile, the organic food market has experienced significant growth, with consumers showing a growing appetite for foodstuffs that are, quite literally, "unmodified." Against this backdrop, it is essential to explore the interplay between GMO use in corn and the demand for organic foods.
The aim of this paper is to uncover the connections between the utilization of GMOs in the corn fields of Missouri and the sales volume of organic food across the United States. This investigation presents an opportunity to not only examine the statistical correlation between these two seemingly disparate realms, but also to peel back the husk, so to speak, on the intricate dynamics of the agricultural market. By shedding light on this intriguing relationship, we hope to spur further examination and stimulate discussions that go beyond the usual "stalk" of academic discourse.
At the heart of our inquiry lies the question: Do the surreptitious tendrils of GMOs—forged through advanced science and technology—impact the flourishing growth of organic food industry? Through the implementation of rigorous statistical analysis and comprehensive data investigation, we aim to unearth the core of this "cornundrum" and to cultivate a greater understanding of how these developments shape the agricultural landscape of the United States.
So, let us embark on this maize-ing journey into the world of corn, GMOs, and organic food sales, armed with the tools of statistical analysis and a healthy sense of humor. The time has come to harvest a bounty of knowledge from the field of agricultural economics, sow the seeds of understanding, and reap a cornucopia of insight into this intriguing correlation.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

A comprehensive review of the existing literature regarding the relationship between GMO utilization in the corn fields of Missouri and the sales volume of organic food in the United States reveals a rich tapestry of research and inquiry. Smith et al. (2010) present an in-depth analysis of the agricultural landscape, exploring the impact of GMO adoption on crop yields and economic outcomes. Doe and Jones (2015) offer a nuanced perspective on consumer behavior and preferences, shedding light on the burgeoning organic food market. These studies collectively lay the groundwork for our exploration, providing a foundation upon which to build our investigation into this perplexing maize of correlations.

In "The Omnivore's Dilemma," Pollan (2006) ventures into the tangled web of modern food production, probing the notion of authenticity in an era of GMO dominance. Shiva (2016) delves into the contentious terrain of agricultural biotechnology in "Who Really Feeds the World?", casting a critical eye on the implications of GMO proliferation. These critical works offer valuable insights into the socio-cultural dimensions of GMO usage and its relationship to organic food sales, broadening the scope of our inquiry beyond mere statistical analysis.

On a more whimsical note, fictional narratives such as Atwood's "Oryx and Crake" and Kingsolver's "Animal, Vegetable, Miracle" provide imaginative forays into the realm of genetically modified organisms and organic farming, inviting us to consider the broader implications of these agricultural developments through the lens of storytelling and allegory. These literary works, while not grounded in empirical data, nevertheless contribute to the discourse surrounding GMOs and organic food, reminding us that the cultural resonance of these topics extends far beyond the confines of academic research.

Turning our attention to the realm of cinema, the documentary "Food, Inc." and the animated film "Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs" offer visual narratives that touch upon the complexities of food production, albeit with differing degrees of seriousness. The former provides a sobering exploration of industrialized agriculture and its impact on consumer choices, while the latter serves up a whimsical depiction of a world where food literally falls from the sky. While these films may not directly address the specific connection between GMO corn in Missouri and organic food sales nationwide, they nevertheless contribute to the public awareness and discourse surrounding food-related issues.

In synthesizing the disparate strands of research, literature, and popular culture, we are poised to embark on a journey of inquiry that will not only yield statistical insights but also cultivate a deeper understanding of the intricate interplay between GMO usage in corn and the sales volume of organic food in the United States. This examination, infused with levity and intellectual rigor, holds the promise of unearthing kernels of wisdom that transcend the conventional boundaries of academic discourse.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics 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 GMO use in corn grown in Missouri and Organic Food Sales Volume in the United States. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from USDA and Statista . You used data from 2000 to 2012

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

Here is the title, abstract, and introduction of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
The Corn-GMO Storm: A Maize-ing Connection to Organic Sales Volume

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research delves into the deliciously intriguing relationship between the utilization of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in the corn fields of Missouri and the voluminous sales of organic food across the United States. With a kernel of curiosity, we utilized data from the USDA and Statista to scrutinize this agrarian enigma. Our findings unveil a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9438119, with a p-value less than 0.01 for the time period of 2000 to 2012. This cornundrum has us pondering the corncerns of GMO skeptics and organic enthusiasts alike, reaping kernels of knowledge and food for thought. Our examination of this correlation peels back the layers of agri-culture and invites further exploration into the intertwined world of genetically modified corn and organic food sales.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
Corn, also known as maize (or should we say, "maize-ing"), stands as one of the most important crops in the United States, not only for its pivotal role in agriculture but also for its versatility as a food staple, an industrial product, and even a source of entertainment during summer barbecues. The introduction of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) into the cultivation of corn has sparked extensive debate and controversy, garnering attention from both the scientific community and the general public. Meanwhile, the organic food market has experienced significant growth, with consumers showing a growing appetite for foodstuffs that are, quite literally, "unmodified." Against this backdrop, it is essential to explore the interplay between GMO use in corn and the demand for organic foods.
The aim of this paper is to uncover the connections between the utilization of GMOs in the corn fields of Missouri and the sales volume of organic food across the United States. This investigation presents an opportunity to not only examine the statistical correlation between these two seemingly disparate realms, but also to peel back the husk, so to speak, on the intricate dynamics of the agricultural market. By shedding light on this intriguing relationship, we hope to spur further examination and stimulate discussions that go beyond the usual "stalk" of academic discourse.
At the heart of our inquiry lies the question: Do the surreptitious tendrils of GMOs—forged through advanced science and technology—impact the flourishing growth of organic food industry? Through the implementation of rigorous statistical analysis and comprehensive data investigation, we aim to unearth the core of this "cornundrum" and to cultivate a greater understanding of how these developments shape the agricultural landscape of the United States.
So, let us embark on this maize-ing journey into the world of corn, GMOs, and organic food sales, armed with the tools of statistical analysis and a healthy sense of humor. The time has come to harvest a bounty of knowledge from the field of agricultural economics, sow the seeds of understanding, and reap a cornucopia of insight into this intriguing correlation.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To understand the tantalizing connection between GMO use in corn grown in Missouri and the sales volume of organic food in the United States, we employed a robust methodology that was as carefully crafted as a perfectly popped bowl of corn. Our research team meticulously gathered data from the USDA and Statista, using information spanning from the year 2000 to 2012. We then undertook a series of analyses that were more intricate than counting kernels on a cob.

First, we procured data on GMO use in corn grown in the splendid fields of Missouri, focusing on factors such as acreage, yield, and adoption rates. This data was as essential to our research as butter is to corn on the cob—simply inseparable. Subsequently, we delved into organic food sales volume in the United States, scrutinizing market trends, consumer preferences, and purchasing patterns. We navigated through this extensive data with a keen eye, much like a farmer scanning their fields for the first signs of growth in the spring.

Drawing inspiration from the roots of econometric analysis, we employed rigorous statistical methods to unveil the underlying relationship between these two seemingly disparate realms. Our fancy statistical techniques included nonlinear regressions, propensity score matching, and instrumental variables analysis, all chosen with the same level of discernment one uses to select the perfect ear of corn from the market. We then adorned our analysis with a robust set of control variables, like sprinkling some seasoning on popcorn, to ensure a comprehensive understanding of the interaction between GMO use and organic food sales volume.

Moreover, to truly capture the dynamics of this correlation, we conducted a series of sensitivity analyses akin to adjusting the heat and cook time to achieve the perfect batch of caramelized popcorn. Sensitivity analyses were performed to test the robustness of our results against various assumptions and potential confounding factors, demonstrating our unwavering commitment to peeling back the husk of uncertainty surrounding this agricultural enigma.

In summary, our methodology was as thorough as shucking a corn cob before a summer barbecue, leaving no kernel unturned in our pursuit of understanding the maiznificent connection between GMO use in corn and the sales volume of organic food. Our approach allowed us to embark on this cornucopia of inquiry armed with statistical rigor, boundless curiosity, and a healthy appreciation for the complexities of the agricultural market.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics 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 GMO use in corn grown in Missouri and Organic Food Sales Volume in the United States. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from USDA and Statista .

For the time period 2000 to 2012, you found a correlation 0.9438119, r-squared of 0.8907810, 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]]
The Corn-GMO Storm: A Maize-ing Connection to Organic Sales Volume

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research delves into the deliciously intriguing relationship between the utilization of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in the corn fields of Missouri and the voluminous sales of organic food across the United States. With a kernel of curiosity, we utilized data from the USDA and Statista to scrutinize this agrarian enigma. Our findings unveil a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9438119, with a p-value less than 0.01 for the time period of 2000 to 2012. This cornundrum has us pondering the corncerns of GMO skeptics and organic enthusiasts alike, reaping kernels of knowledge and food for thought. Our examination of this correlation peels back the layers of agri-culture and invites further exploration into the intertwined world of genetically modified corn and organic food sales.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
Corn, also known as maize (or should we say, "maize-ing"), stands as one of the most important crops in the United States, not only for its pivotal role in agriculture but also for its versatility as a food staple, an industrial product, and even a source of entertainment during summer barbecues. The introduction of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) into the cultivation of corn has sparked extensive debate and controversy, garnering attention from both the scientific community and the general public. Meanwhile, the organic food market has experienced significant growth, with consumers showing a growing appetite for foodstuffs that are, quite literally, "unmodified." Against this backdrop, it is essential to explore the interplay between GMO use in corn and the demand for organic foods.
The aim of this paper is to uncover the connections between the utilization of GMOs in the corn fields of Missouri and the sales volume of organic food across the United States. This investigation presents an opportunity to not only examine the statistical correlation between these two seemingly disparate realms, but also to peel back the husk, so to speak, on the intricate dynamics of the agricultural market. By shedding light on this intriguing relationship, we hope to spur further examination and stimulate discussions that go beyond the usual "stalk" of academic discourse.
At the heart of our inquiry lies the question: Do the surreptitious tendrils of GMOs—forged through advanced science and technology—impact the flourishing growth of organic food industry? Through the implementation of rigorous statistical analysis and comprehensive data investigation, we aim to unearth the core of this "cornundrum" and to cultivate a greater understanding of how these developments shape the agricultural landscape of the United States.
So, let us embark on this maize-ing journey into the world of corn, GMOs, and organic food sales, armed with the tools of statistical analysis and a healthy sense of humor. The time has come to harvest a bounty of knowledge from the field of agricultural economics, sow the seeds of understanding, and reap a cornucopia of insight into this intriguing correlation.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The results of our investigation revealed a statistically significant correlation between the utilization of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn grown in Missouri and the sales volume of organic food across the United States. The correlation coefficient of 0.9438119 indicated a remarkably strong positive association between these two variables. This finding suggests a robust relationship that certainly cannot be dismissed as mere "corn-incidence."

Furthermore, the coefficient of determination (r-squared) of 0.8907810 signifies that approximately 89.08% of the variability in organic food sales volume can be explained by the utilization of GMOs in corn production in Missouri. This substantial r-squared value emphasizes the substantial impact that GMOs in corn may have on the burgeoning growth of the organic food market. It's truly "a-maize-ing" how much insight can be gleaned from this statistical analysis.

Moreover, with a p-value of less than 0.01, we can reject the null hypothesis and affirm the presence of a significant correlation. This p-value provides compelling evidence that the correlation we observed is not the result of random chance, ensuring that our findings are as solid as a cob of corn in a field.

At this juncture, it is crucial to highlight the significance of these results within the broader context of agricultural economics. The high correlation we uncovered raises thought-provoking questions and opens the door to further inquiry into the intricate interplay between GMO use in corn and the demand for organic food. This tantalizing correlation between these seemingly dichotomous aspects of the agricultural market beckons both skeptics and enthusiasts alike to the table for a hearty feast of discussion and debate.

Fig. 1 displays a scatterplot illustrating the striking correlation between GMO use in corn and organic food sales volume. The tightly clustered data points form a visually captivating and persuasive representation of the relationship we uncovered. The scatterplot serves as a compelling visual aid that speaks volumes about the interdependence of these agricultural phenomena.

In conclusion, our research unearths a compelling relationship between the utilization of GMOs in corn grown in Missouri and the sales volume of organic food across the United States. This "maize-ing" connection piques the curiosity of both scholars and laypersons alike, enticing them to delve deeper into the fertile fields of agricultural economics. The implications of this correlation hold promise for an array of discussions and future research endeavors, and we eagerly anticipate the fruitful harvest of knowledge that will ensue from further exploration of this captivating cornucopia of statistical relationships.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics 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 GMO use in corn grown in Missouri and Organic Food Sales Volume in the United States. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Limit your response to 500 tokens.

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

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

[[TITLE]]
The Corn-GMO Storm: A Maize-ing Connection to Organic Sales Volume

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research delves into the deliciously intriguing relationship between the utilization of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in the corn fields of Missouri and the voluminous sales of organic food across the United States. With a kernel of curiosity, we utilized data from the USDA and Statista to scrutinize this agrarian enigma. Our findings unveil a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9438119, with a p-value less than 0.01 for the time period of 2000 to 2012. This cornundrum has us pondering the corncerns of GMO skeptics and organic enthusiasts alike, reaping kernels of knowledge and food for thought. Our examination of this correlation peels back the layers of agri-culture and invites further exploration into the intertwined world of genetically modified corn and organic food sales.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
A comprehensive review of the existing literature regarding the relationship between GMO utilization in the corn fields of Missouri and the sales volume of organic food in the United States reveals a rich tapestry of research and inquiry. Smith et al. (2010) present an in-depth analysis of the agricultural landscape, exploring the impact of GMO adoption on crop yields and economic outcomes. Doe and Jones (2015) offer a nuanced perspective on consumer behavior and preferences, shedding light on the burgeoning organic food market. These studies collectively lay the groundwork for our exploration, providing a foundation upon which to build our investigation into this perplexing maize of correlations.
In "The Omnivore's Dilemma," Pollan (2006) ventures into the tangled web of modern food production, probing the notion of authenticity in an era of GMO dominance. Shiva (2016) delves into the contentious terrain of agricultural biotechnology in "Who Really Feeds the World?", casting a critical eye on the implications of GMO proliferation. These critical works offer valuable insights into the socio-cultural dimensions of GMO usage and its relationship to organic food sales, broadening the scope of our inquiry beyond mere statistical analysis.
On a more whimsical note, fictional narratives such as Atwood's "Oryx and Crake" and Kingsolver's "Animal, Vegetable, Miracle" provide imaginative forays into the realm of genetically modified organisms and organic farming, inviting us to consider the broader implications of these agricultural developments through the lens of storytelling and allegory. These literary works, while not grounded in empirical data, nevertheless contribute to the discourse surrounding GMOs and organic food, reminding us that the cultural resonance of these topics extends far beyond the confines of academic research.
Turning our attention to the realm of cinema, the documentary "Food, Inc." and the animated film "Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs" offer visual narratives that touch upon the complexities of food production, albeit with differing degrees of seriousness. The former provides a sobering exploration of industrialized agriculture and its impact on consumer choices, while the latter serves up a whimsical depiction of a world where food literally falls from the sky. While these films may not directly address the specific connection between GMO corn in Missouri and organic food sales nationwide, they nevertheless contribute to the public awareness and discourse surrounding food-related issues.
In synthesizing the disparate strands of research, literature, and popular culture, we are poised to embark on a journey of inquiry that will not only yield statistical insights but also cultivate a deeper understanding of the intricate interplay between GMO usage in corn and the sales volume of organic food in the United States. This examination, infused with levity and intellectual rigor, holds the promise of unearthing kernels of wisdom that transcend the conventional boundaries of academic discourse.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our investigation revealed a statistically significant correlation between the utilization of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn grown in Missouri and the sales volume of organic food across the United States. The correlation coefficient of 0.9438119 indicated a remarkably strong positive association between these two variables. This finding suggests a robust relationship that certainly cannot be dismissed as mere "corn-incidence."
Furthermore, the coefficient of determination (r-squared) of 0.8907810 signifies that approximately 89.08% of the variability in organic food sales volume can be explained by the utilization of GMOs in corn production in Missouri. This substantial r-squared value emphasizes the substantial impact that GMOs in corn may have on the burgeoning growth of the organic food market. It's truly "a-maize-ing" how much insight can be gleaned from this statistical analysis.
Moreover, with a p-value of less than 0.01, we can reject the null hypothesis and affirm the presence of a significant correlation. This p-value provides compelling evidence that the correlation we observed is not the result of random chance, ensuring that our findings are as solid as a cob of corn in a field.
At this juncture, it is crucial to highlight the significance of these results within the broader context of agricultural economics. The high correlation we uncovered raises thought-provoking questions and opens the door to further inquiry into the intricate interplay between GMO use in corn and the demand for organic food. This tantalizing correlation between these seemingly dichotomous aspects of the agricultural market beckons both skeptics and enthusiasts alike to the table for a hearty feast of discussion and debate.
Fig. 1 displays a scatterplot illustrating the striking correlation between GMO use in corn and organic food sales volume. The tightly clustered data points form a visually captivating and persuasive representation of the relationship we uncovered. The scatterplot serves as a compelling visual aid that speaks volumes about the interdependence of these agricultural phenomena.
In conclusion, our research unearths a compelling relationship between the utilization of GMOs in corn grown in Missouri and the sales volume of organic food across the United States. This "maize-ing" connection piques the curiosity of both scholars and laypersons alike, enticing them to delve deeper into the fertile fields of agricultural economics. The implications of this correlation hold promise for an array of discussions and future research endeavors, and we eagerly anticipate the fruitful harvest of knowledge that will ensue from further exploration of this captivating cornucopia of statistical relationships.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The results of our investigation have unearthed an intriguing correlation between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn grown in Missouri and the sales volume of organic food across the United States. We find ourselves in a veritable cornucopia of statistical relationships, a-maize-ing as it may seem.

Our findings support and elaborate on the research conducted by Smith et al. (2010) and Doe and Jones (2015), both of whom offered valuable insights and paved the way for our investigation. The correlation coefficient of 0.9438119 that we observed aligns with the concerns raised by Smith et al. regarding the implications of GMO adoption on agricultural outcomes. And who would have thought that Doe and Jones' work on consumer behavior and preferences would play a kernel role in substantiating our findings on organic food sales volume?

In a similar vein, the whimsical forays into the realm of genetically modified organisms found in fictional narratives such as Atwood's "Oryx and Crake" and Kingsolver's "Animal, Vegetable, Miracle" have provided an imaginative lens through which to view the agricultural landscape. Are we seeing reality mirrored in these fictional works, or are they simply corn-troversial? Nevertheless, their impact on our thinking cannot be dismissed as mere fiction!

Our substantial coefficient of determination (r-squared) of 0.8907810 sheds light on the intricate interplay between GMOs in corn and the burgeoning growth of the organic food market. The substantial variability in organic food sales volume explained by the utilization of GMOs in corn production highlights the profound impact of genetic modification on consumer choices. As the saying goes, "when it rains, it pours" – in this case, organic sales have poured forth with a-MAIZE-ing enthusiasm.

Moreover, we are able to confidently reject the null hypothesis, as indicated by a p-value of less than 0.01. This further strengthens the validity of our findings and ensures they are as solid as a cob of corn in a field. It’s not just a corn-incidence – our findings are rooted in sound statistical evidence.

Our results not only lend support to existing research but also raise a cornucopia of new questions and paradigms for future inquiry. It is evident that the relationship between GMO use in corn and the demand for organic food is ripe for further exploration. We anticipate a bountiful harvest of knowledge and lively discussions in the agricultural economics field, and we look forward to reaping what we've sown in this fertile ground of statistical insight.

In the words of the great bard, William Shake-spear, "What's in a grain? That which we call a rose by any other name would taste as sweet." So, whether it's GMO or organic, the taste of knowledge derived from this research is equally delightful.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics 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 GMO use in corn grown in Missouri and Organic Food Sales Volume in the United States. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

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

Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
The Corn-GMO Storm: A Maize-ing Connection to Organic Sales Volume

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research delves into the deliciously intriguing relationship between the utilization of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in the corn fields of Missouri and the voluminous sales of organic food across the United States. With a kernel of curiosity, we utilized data from the USDA and Statista to scrutinize this agrarian enigma. Our findings unveil a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9438119, with a p-value less than 0.01 for the time period of 2000 to 2012. This cornundrum has us pondering the corncerns of GMO skeptics and organic enthusiasts alike, reaping kernels of knowledge and food for thought. Our examination of this correlation peels back the layers of agri-culture and invites further exploration into the intertwined world of genetically modified corn and organic food sales.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
Corn, also known as maize (or should we say, "maize-ing"), stands as one of the most important crops in the United States, not only for its pivotal role in agriculture but also for its versatility as a food staple, an industrial product, and even a source of entertainment during summer barbecues. The introduction of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) into the cultivation of corn has sparked extensive debate and controversy, garnering attention from both the scientific community and the general public. Meanwhile, the organic food market has experienced significant growth, with consumers showing a growing appetite for foodstuffs that are, quite literally, "unmodified." Against this backdrop, it is essential to explore the interplay between GMO use in corn and the demand for organic foods.
The aim of this paper is to uncover the connections between the utilization of GMOs in the corn fields of Missouri and the sales volume of organic food across the United States. This investigation presents an opportunity to not only examine the statistical correlation between these two seemingly disparate realms, but also to peel back the husk, so to speak, on the intricate dynamics of the agricultural market. By shedding light on this intriguing relationship, we hope to spur further examination and stimulate discussions that go beyond the usual "stalk" of academic discourse.
At the heart of our inquiry lies the question: Do the surreptitious tendrils of GMOs—forged through advanced science and technology—impact the flourishing growth of organic food industry? Through the implementation of rigorous statistical analysis and comprehensive data investigation, we aim to unearth the core of this "cornundrum" and to cultivate a greater understanding of how these developments shape the agricultural landscape of the United States.
So, let us embark on this maize-ing journey into the world of corn, GMOs, and organic food sales, armed with the tools of statistical analysis and a healthy sense of humor. The time has come to harvest a bounty of knowledge from the field of agricultural economics, sow the seeds of understanding, and reap a cornucopia of insight into this intriguing correlation.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our investigation revealed a statistically significant correlation between the utilization of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in corn grown in Missouri and the sales volume of organic food across the United States. The correlation coefficient of 0.9438119 indicated a remarkably strong positive association between these two variables. This finding suggests a robust relationship that certainly cannot be dismissed as mere "corn-incidence."
Furthermore, the coefficient of determination (r-squared) of 0.8907810 signifies that approximately 89.08% of the variability in organic food sales volume can be explained by the utilization of GMOs in corn production in Missouri. This substantial r-squared value emphasizes the substantial impact that GMOs in corn may have on the burgeoning growth of the organic food market. It's truly "a-maize-ing" how much insight can be gleaned from this statistical analysis.
Moreover, with a p-value of less than 0.01, we can reject the null hypothesis and affirm the presence of a significant correlation. This p-value provides compelling evidence that the correlation we observed is not the result of random chance, ensuring that our findings are as solid as a cob of corn in a field.
At this juncture, it is crucial to highlight the significance of these results within the broader context of agricultural economics. The high correlation we uncovered raises thought-provoking questions and opens the door to further inquiry into the intricate interplay between GMO use in corn and the demand for organic food. This tantalizing correlation between these seemingly dichotomous aspects of the agricultural market beckons both skeptics and enthusiasts alike to the table for a hearty feast of discussion and debate.
Fig. 1 displays a scatterplot illustrating the striking correlation between GMO use in corn and organic food sales volume. The tightly clustered data points form a visually captivating and persuasive representation of the relationship we uncovered. The scatterplot serves as a compelling visual aid that speaks volumes about the interdependence of these agricultural phenomena.
In conclusion, our research unearths a compelling relationship between the utilization of GMOs in corn grown in Missouri and the sales volume of organic food across the United States. This "maize-ing" connection piques the curiosity of both scholars and laypersons alike, enticing them to delve deeper into the fertile fields of agricultural economics. The implications of this correlation hold promise for an array of discussions and future research endeavors, and we eagerly anticipate the fruitful harvest of knowledge that will ensue from further exploration of this captivating cornucopia of statistical relationships.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our investigation into the connection between GMO use in corn grown in Missouri and organic food sales volume in the United States has unveiled a compelling correlation that cannot be dismissed as mere "corn-incidence." The statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.9438119 and the impressive coefficient of determination (r-squared) of 0.8907810 emphasize the substantial impact of GMOs in corn production on the burgeoning growth of the organic food market. It's quite "a-maize-ing" how much insight can be gleaned from this statistical analysis. The scatterplot serves as a visually captivating and persuasive representation of the relationship we uncovered, attracting attention like a stalk of corn at a farmers' market.

The implications of this correlation are ripe for further discussion and research, offering a bounty of knowledge and food for thought for scholars and enthusiasts alike. However, it is essential to acknowledge the limitations of our study, particularly the focus on the time period of 2000 to 2012. As the agricultural landscape continues to evolve, future research should aim to cultivate a deeper understanding of this intriguing correlation across different time frames and geographical regions.

In light of our findings, we assert that no more research is needed in this area. The "stalk" of knowledge we have harvested from this study, much like a cob of corn, is a-maize-ingly substantial, and we eagerly anticipate the fruitful discussions and insights that will sprout from this fertile ground of statistical relationships.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of academic journals. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding research, scientific, or academic journal that would publish a paper entited The Corn-GMO Storm: A Maize-ing Connection to Organic Sales Volume. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Agri-Science Innovation and Sustainability


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of nonprofit research organizations and associations. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding nonprofit, academic, or scientific association or organization that would sponsor research that resulted in a paper entited The Corn-GMO Storm: A Maize-ing Connection to Organic Sales Volume. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Center for Agricultural Innovation and Sustainable Development


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide potential search keywords separated by commas. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide potential search keywords for a paper titled The Corn-GMO Storm: A Maize-ing Connection to Organic Sales Volume with an abstract of This research delves into the deliciously intriguing relationship between the utilization of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in the corn fields of Missouri and the voluminous sales of organic food across the United States. With a kernel of curiosity, we utilized data from the USDA and Statista to scrutinize this agrarian enigma. Our findings unveil a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9438119, with a p-value less than 0.01 for the time period of 2000 to 2012. This cornundrum has us pondering the corncerns of GMO skeptics and organic enthusiasts alike, reaping kernels of knowledge and food for thought. Our examination of this correlation peels back the layers of agri-culture and invites further exploration into the intertwined world of genetically modified corn and organic food sales.

ChatGPT:

genetically modified organisms, GMOs, corn fields, Missouri, organic food sales, correlation, USDA data, Statista, agri-culture, organic enthusiasts, genetically modified corn, sales volume trend

*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

GMO use in corn grown in Missouri
Detailed data title: Percent of all corn planted in Missouri that is genetically modified to be herbicide-tolerant (HT), but not insect-resistant (Bt)
Source: USDA
See what else correlates with GMO use in corn grown in Missouri

Organic Food Sales Volume in the United States
Source: Statista
See what else correlates with Organic Food Sales Volume in the United States

Correlation r = 0.9438119 (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 = 0.8907810 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 89.1% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Organic Food Sales Volume in the United States) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., GMO use in corn grown in Missouri) over the 13 years from 2000 through 2012.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 1.3E-6. 0.0000012680146483754994000000
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 0.94 in 0.00013% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 788,634 random variables You don't actually need 788 thousand variables to find a correlation like this one. I don't have that many variables in my database. You can also correlate variables that are not independent. I do this a lot.

p-value calculations are useful for understanding the probability of a result happening by chance. They are most useful when used to highlight the risk of a fluke outcome. For example, if you calculate a p-value of 0.30, the risk that the result is a fluke is high. It is good to know that! But there are lots of ways to get a p-value of less than 0.01, as evidenced by this project.

In this particular case, the values are so extreme as to be meaningless. That's why no one reports p-values with specificity after they drop below 0.01.

Just to be clear: I'm being completely transparent about the calculations. There is no math trickery. This is just how statistics shakes out when you calculate hundreds of millions of random correlations.
with the same 12 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 12 because we have two variables measured over a period of 13 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.

[ 0.82, 0.98 ] 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.
2000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012
GMO use in corn grown in Missouri (GMO corn %)6869131214192117192220
Organic Food Sales Volume in the United States (Sales in US Dollars)61000000007360000000863500000010381000000120020000001422300000017221000000204100000002360700000024803000000267080000002922000000031320000000




Why this works

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




Try it yourself

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

    return correlation, r_squared, p_value

# These are the arrays for the variables shown on this page, but you can modify them to be any two sets of numbers
array_1 = np.array([6,8,6,9,13,12,14,19,21,17,19,22,20,])
array_2 = np.array([6100000000,7360000000,8635000000,10381000000,12002000000,14223000000,17221000000,20410000000,23607000000,24803000000,26708000000,29220000000,31320000000,])
array_1_name = "GMO use in corn grown in Missouri"
array_2_name = "Organic Food Sales Volume in the United States"

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

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



Reuseable content

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

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

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

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

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

Download images for these variables:


View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Your rating is pure awesomeness!


Correlation ID: 1487 · Black Variable ID: 731 · Red Variable ID: 492
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0