Spurious correlation #1,502 · 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 cotton and the second variable is Google searches for 'desktop background'. The chart goes from 2007 to 2022, and the two variables track closely in value over that time.

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is GMO use in cotton and the second variable is Google searches for 'desktop background'. The chart goes from 2007 to 2022, and the two variables track closely in value over that time.

Download png, svg

AI explanation

As GMO use in cotton decreased, the size of cotton plants also decreased. This led to a shortage of raw material for making oversized, novelty desktop backgrounds. Consequently, people lost interest in searching for desktop backgrounds, especially the ones featuring larger-than-life cotton fields.

^{Show image generation prompt} Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image that closely resembles a TIME magazine cover, showcasing a bustling cotton field as the main focus. In the foreground, depict a farmer holding a smartphone, visibly searching "desktop background" on Google. Meanwhile, in the background, include a tractor with a prominent "GMO Cotton" label. The scene should be set in a vibrant, pastoral setting, capturing the interaction between modern technology and traditional farming in a visually captivating manner. 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 cotton and Google searches for 'desktop background'. 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: High-tech Realistic A TIME magazine cover image Minimalism 3D Pixar Style
ChatGPT: A TIME magazine cover 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 cotton and Google searches for 'desktop background' together. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a bustling cotton field, a farmer is using a smartphone to search "desktop background" on Google while a tractor with a "GMO Cotton" sign works in the background.

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 TIME magazine cover image ] and depicting this scene: In a bustling cotton field, a farmer is using a smartphone to search "desktop background" on Google while a tractor with a "GMO Cotton" sign works in the background. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image that closely resembles a TIME magazine cover, showcasing a bustling cotton field as the main focus. In the foreground, depict a farmer holding a smartphone, visibly searching "desktop background" on Google. Meanwhile, in the background, include a tractor with a prominent "GMO Cotton" label. The scene should be set in a vibrant, pastoral setting, capturing the interaction between modern technology and traditional farming in a visually captivating manner.

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

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

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)

Cotton GMO Grow, Desktop Background Glow: A Rhyme-y Study of Google Trends and Agricultural Prose

Journal of Agro-Tech Trends and Linguistic Analysis

Jan 2024

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

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

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.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 cotton and Google searches for 'desktop background'. 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 devolve ever further, and mention something completely ridiculous, like you conducted literature review by reading the backs of shampoo bottles.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Cotton GMO Grow, Desktop Background Glow: A Rhyme-y Study of Google Trends and Agricultural Prose"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we delved into the curious world of genetically modified cotton and its seemingly bizarre interaction with the virtual world of desktop backgrounds. With a fancy correlation coefficient of 0.9553797 and p-value less than 0.01, we journeyed from the USDA fields of cotton to the digital playground of Google searches. Our findings revealed a hilarious connection that leaves one wondering if cotton truly has a fiber-optic cable connection to our computer screens. Prepare to be amused as we uncover the unlikely correlation between GMO cotton and Google searches for 'desktop background', leaving us to ponder whether there's some secret algorithmic affinity between organic and digital cultivation.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
Introduction
As the world becomes increasingly interconnected, it is important for researchers to explore the unexpected and often humorous relationships that emerge between seemingly unrelated phenomena. In this study, we embark on a whimsical journey through the fields of agricultural biotechnology and the digital landscape of virtual imagery. Our focus is the intriguing correlation between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton production and Google searches for 'desktop background'. While at first glance, these two subjects may appear as unrelated as a cow and a keyboard, our findings shed light on a connection that can only be described as a "virtual farm to screen" phenomenon.
The cultivation of GMO cotton has been a subject of much debate and discussion, with proponents touting its potential for increased yield and pest resistance, while skeptics raise concerns about environmental impact and consumer health. Meanwhile, the world of virtual imagery and desktop backgrounds offers a colorful array of visual delights, from serene landscapes to quirky illustrations, serving as a digital canvas for personal expression and creativity. The intersection of these two seemingly disparate realms may seem as unlikely as a sheep attending a technology conference, but the data we have amassed suggests otherwise.
Our investigation has led us to delve into the realm of Google Trends, where we have observed a perplexing pattern of correlation between the adoption of GMO cotton and searches for 'desktop background'. Armed with statistical rigor and a healthy dose of humor, we aim to unravel this enigmatic connection and offer insights that are both academically enriching and delightfully amusing. Prepare to be entertained as we embark on a journey that traverses the fields of agriculture and the landscapes of cyberspace, navigating a route that is as unpredictable as a goat browsing the internet.
In the following sections, we will delve into the methodology employed, the data collected, and the statistical analysis conducted to elucidate the nature of this quirky correlation. Our findings not only open new avenues for interdisciplinary exploration but also invite a lighthearted appreciation for the unexpected whimsy that permeates the world of scientific inquiry. So, buckle up and prepare to embark on this scholarly and adventurous romp through the worlds of cotton GMOs and virtual desktop decor.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

As researchers don our figurative academic spectacles and embark on a journey through the annals of scholarly work, we are reminded of the substantial body of literature that has contributed to our understanding of genetically modified cotton and the whimsically improbable connection it seems to have with Google searches for 'desktop background'. This literature informs our current study, providing both a foundation of knowledge and a healthy dose of amusement that is essential for navigating the delightful conundrum before us.

Smith et al. (2017) uncovered the intricate web of genetic engineering in cotton, elucidating the development of pest-resistant varieties and the implications for agricultural sustainability. This work serves as the serious backdrop against which our comical correlation with virtual desktop imagery unfolds—a pairing as unexpected as a vegan in a butcher shop. Meanwhile, Doe and Jones (2019) delved into the ethical considerations of GMO cultivation, raising important questions about the implications for biodiversity and ecosystems. Little did they know, their musings would find an unlikely companion in the world of digital aesthetics.

In "The Cotton Connection: A Comprehensive Guide to Agricultural Wonder" and "The Digital Canvas Unveiled: Exploring Desktop Imagery in the 21st Century," authors delve into the worlds of cotton farming and digital art, respectively. One offers insights into the cultivation of the humble cotton plant, while the other unravels the virtual tapestry of desktop backgrounds—two realms seemingly as distant as a cow and a mouse. These works provided the serious backdrop against which our comical correlation revealed itself, which, I must say, was as surprising as discovering a hidden trove of memes in a scientific journal.

Taking a sharp detour into the land of fiction, works such as "The Genetically Modified Garden" and "The Pixels of Ploughshares: Adventures in Virtual Reality Farming" provide a whimsical juxtaposition of the agricultural and digital worlds. While their contents are undoubtedly fantastical, they unexpectedly shed light on the peculiar intersection we investigate, leaving us to ponder whether GMO cotton has a secret affinity for pixelated meadows and serene landscapes that adorn computer screens.

Venturing into more unconventional sources, such as the backs of shampoo bottles and the labels of canned goods, we honed our intuition for unexpected connections and comical revelations. While these sources may not have scholarly credentials, they certainly enriched our understanding of the playful humor that underlies the investigation at hand, offering insights as puzzling as finding a garden gnome in the produce aisle.

With a nod to this whimsical range of literature that informs our inquiry, we proceed to unravel the enthralling connection between GMO cotton and Google searches for 'desktop background', armed with scholarly rigor and a hearty sense of amusement.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.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 cotton and Google searches for 'desktop background'. Make lots of 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 Google Trends . You used data from 2007 to 2022

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

Here is the title, abstract, and introduction of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Cotton GMO Grow, Desktop Background Glow: A Rhyme-y Study of Google Trends and Agricultural Prose"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we delved into the curious world of genetically modified cotton and its seemingly bizarre interaction with the virtual world of desktop backgrounds. With a fancy correlation coefficient of 0.9553797 and p-value less than 0.01, we journeyed from the USDA fields of cotton to the digital playground of Google searches. Our findings revealed a hilarious connection that leaves one wondering if cotton truly has a fiber-optic cable connection to our computer screens. Prepare to be amused as we uncover the unlikely correlation between GMO cotton and Google searches for 'desktop background', leaving us to ponder whether there's some secret algorithmic affinity between organic and digital cultivation.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
Introduction
As the world becomes increasingly interconnected, it is important for researchers to explore the unexpected and often humorous relationships that emerge between seemingly unrelated phenomena. In this study, we embark on a whimsical journey through the fields of agricultural biotechnology and the digital landscape of virtual imagery. Our focus is the intriguing correlation between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton production and Google searches for 'desktop background'. While at first glance, these two subjects may appear as unrelated as a cow and a keyboard, our findings shed light on a connection that can only be described as a "virtual farm to screen" phenomenon.
The cultivation of GMO cotton has been a subject of much debate and discussion, with proponents touting its potential for increased yield and pest resistance, while skeptics raise concerns about environmental impact and consumer health. Meanwhile, the world of virtual imagery and desktop backgrounds offers a colorful array of visual delights, from serene landscapes to quirky illustrations, serving as a digital canvas for personal expression and creativity. The intersection of these two seemingly disparate realms may seem as unlikely as a sheep attending a technology conference, but the data we have amassed suggests otherwise.
Our investigation has led us to delve into the realm of Google Trends, where we have observed a perplexing pattern of correlation between the adoption of GMO cotton and searches for 'desktop background'. Armed with statistical rigor and a healthy dose of humor, we aim to unravel this enigmatic connection and offer insights that are both academically enriching and delightfully amusing. Prepare to be entertained as we embark on a journey that traverses the fields of agriculture and the landscapes of cyberspace, navigating a route that is as unpredictable as a goat browsing the internet.
In the following sections, we will delve into the methodology employed, the data collected, and the statistical analysis conducted to elucidate the nature of this quirky correlation. Our findings not only open new avenues for interdisciplinary exploration but also invite a lighthearted appreciation for the unexpected whimsy that permeates the world of scientific inquiry. So, buckle up and prepare to embark on this scholarly and adventurous romp through the worlds of cotton GMOs and virtual desktop decor.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

Sampling and Data Collection:
In order to unravel the perplexing relationship between genetically modified cotton (GMO) and Google searches for 'desktop background', our research team embarked on a digital odyssey through the vast expanse of cyberspace. We utilized data sources that included the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) for cotton production statistics and Google Trends for the frequency of searches related to desktop backgrounds. We sought to capture the zeitgeist of the internet's visual desires and juxtapose it with the agricultural landscapes where GMO cotton flourishes. Our sampling covered a time span from 2007 to 2022, allowing us to track the rise of genetically modified cotton and the evolution of digital imagery preferences over the years.

Digital Harvesting and Statistical Cultivation:
To commence our investigation, we harvested data from USDA reports on GMO cotton adoption rates, production volumes, and geographical distribution. Our digital shears also clipped the bounty of Google Trends data, capturing the ebbs and flows of searches related to desktop backgrounds. We meticulously combed through this data, separating the virtual chaff from the statistical wheat, and prepared it for rigorous statistical analysis.
With data in hand, we employed the time-honored tools of correlation analysis to discern any meaningful relationship between the adoption of GMO cotton and the frequency of Google searches for 'desktop background'. Our statistical plow tilled through the data with measures such as Pearson's correlation coefficient and p-values, ensuring that our findings were not mere phantoms in the virtual winds but rather robust insights rooted in empirical evidence.

Interdisciplinary Cross-Pollination:
One of the unique aspects of our methodology was the interdisciplinary cross-pollination of agricultural and digital realms. We recognized that this investigation demanded a hybrid approach – one that cultivated insights from the fields of biotechnology and the algorithmland of internet search behavior. As such, we fertilized our methodological soil with a blend of agricultural economics and digital analytics, reaping a harvest of findings that straddled the virtual and the tangible, the organic and the algorithmic.

Limitations and Harvesting a Humorous Outlook:
As with any research endeavor, it is essential to consider the limitations of our methodology. While we diligently harvested and analyzed data from USDA and Google Trends, we acknowledge that our findings may bloom within the confines of correlation and do not imply a causative relationship between GMO cotton and desktop background searches. Additionally, the inherently humorous nature of our investigation may elicit lighthearted skepticism, but we assure readers that our statistical analyses are as serious as a farmer deciding which crop to plant.
So, as we proceed to unveil the fruits of our methodological toil and statistical sowing, we invite readers to embrace the light-hearted charm of this scholarly exploration. Just as GMO cotton and desktop backgrounds seem like an odd couple, so too can humor and academic inquiry coexist in a delightful dance. Let us wield statistical tools with a touch of whimsy, and embark on this scholarly escapade with the jovial spirit of a jester in a laboratory coat.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.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 cotton and Google searches for 'desktop background'. Make lots of 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]]
"Cotton GMO Grow, Desktop Background Glow: A Rhyme-y Study of Google Trends and Agricultural Prose"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we delved into the curious world of genetically modified cotton and its seemingly bizarre interaction with the virtual world of desktop backgrounds. With a fancy correlation coefficient of 0.9553797 and p-value less than 0.01, we journeyed from the USDA fields of cotton to the digital playground of Google searches. Our findings revealed a hilarious connection that leaves one wondering if cotton truly has a fiber-optic cable connection to our computer screens. Prepare to be amused as we uncover the unlikely correlation between GMO cotton and Google searches for 'desktop background', leaving us to ponder whether there's some secret algorithmic affinity between organic and digital cultivation.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
As researchers don our figurative academic spectacles and embark on a journey through the annals of scholarly work, we are reminded of the substantial body of literature that has contributed to our understanding of genetically modified cotton and the whimsically improbable connection it seems to have with Google searches for 'desktop background'. This literature informs our current study, providing both a foundation of knowledge and a healthy dose of amusement that is essential for navigating the delightful conundrum before us.
Smith et al. (2017) uncovered the intricate web of genetic engineering in cotton, elucidating the development of pest-resistant varieties and the implications for agricultural sustainability. This work serves as the serious backdrop against which our comical correlation with virtual desktop imagery unfolds—a pairing as unexpected as a vegan in a butcher shop. Meanwhile, Doe and Jones (2019) delved into the ethical considerations of GMO cultivation, raising important questions about the implications for biodiversity and ecosystems. Little did they know, their musings would find an unlikely companion in the world of digital aesthetics.
In "The Cotton Connection: A Comprehensive Guide to Agricultural Wonder" and "The Digital Canvas Unveiled: Exploring Desktop Imagery in the 21st Century," authors delve into the worlds of cotton farming and digital art, respectively. One offers insights into the cultivation of the humble cotton plant, while the other unravels the virtual tapestry of desktop backgrounds—two realms seemingly as distant as a cow and a mouse. These works provided the serious backdrop against which our comical correlation revealed itself, which, I must say, was as surprising as discovering a hidden trove of memes in a scientific journal.
Taking a sharp detour into the land of fiction, works such as "The Genetically Modified Garden" and "The Pixels of Ploughshares: Adventures in Virtual Reality Farming" provide a whimsical juxtaposition of the agricultural and digital worlds. While their contents are undoubtedly fantastical, they unexpectedly shed light on the peculiar intersection we investigate, leaving us to ponder whether GMO cotton has a secret affinity for pixelated meadows and serene landscapes that adorn computer screens.
Venturing into more unconventional sources, such as the backs of shampoo bottles and the labels of canned goods, we honed our intuition for unexpected connections and comical revelations. While these sources may not have scholarly credentials, they certainly enriched our understanding of the playful humor that underlies the investigation at hand, offering insights as puzzling as finding a garden gnome in the produce aisle.
With a nod to this whimsical range of literature that informs our inquiry, we proceed to unravel the enthralling connection between GMO cotton and Google searches for 'desktop background', armed with scholarly rigor and a hearty sense of amusement.

[[RESULTS]]
The statistical analysis of the data collected from 2007 to 2022 revealed a remarkable correlation between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton production and Google searches for 'desktop background'. The correlation coefficient of 0.9553797 suggests a strong positive relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables. Additionally, the r-squared value of 0.9127503 indicates that over 91% of the variability in Google searches for 'desktop background' can be explained by the use of GMO cotton, rendering this correlation not just statistically significant, but practically influential as well.
To visually illustrate this unexpected relationship, we present Figure 1, a scatterplot that graphically encapsulates the association between GMO cotton usage and Google searches for 'desktop background'. We assure you, dear reader, that this figure is not one to be cotton-picking ignored, as it provides a striking visual depiction of the uncanny connection between fields and pixels.
It is important to note that the p-value, being less than 0.01, further validates the significance of this correlation and supports the rejection of the null hypothesis that there is no association between GMO cotton use and Google searches for 'desktop background'.
Now, while this correlation may seem as outlandish as a llama at a laptop, our meticulous data collection and analysis lead us to posit that there is, indeed, a curious link between the agricultural domain and the digital realm. This unexpected finding prompts us to question whether there exists a subliminal message within the cotton fibers themselves, quietly coaxing us to adorn our computer screens with visually pleasing backgrounds.
These results not only emphasize the need for interdisciplinary exploration but also prompt a lighthearted reflection on the whimsical surprises that can emerge from scientific inquiry. The data, while initially perplexing, highlights the interconnectedness of phenomena in both agricultural and virtual landscapes, and indeed, inspires us to wonder if there may be more 'seeds' of correlation waiting to be unearthed in the fertile soil of statistical analysis.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Our study has unveiled a surprisingly robust correlation between the use of genetically modified cotton and Google searches for 'desktop background', demonstrating a connection that is as eye-catching as the most striking digital wallpaper. While the unlikely relationship between agriculture and virtual imagery may initially seem as improbable as finding a unicorn in a cornfield, our results align with previous research findings and provide food for thought, pardon the pun.

Our findings align with the work of Smith et al. (2017), who laid the groundwork for understanding the genetic manipulation of cotton and its implications for agricultural sustainability. The resistance of GMO cotton varieties to pests may indirectly contribute to increased cotton yields, thus influencing the broader availability and visibility of cotton in popular culture—could it be that the ubiquity of cotton fields is subconsciously compelling us to seek aesthetically pleasing desktop backgrounds adorned with serene landscapes, including cotton fields? This notion is indeed as amusing as a comedian finding a hidden talent for trivial puns.

Moreover, our results are in line with the musings of "The Digital Canvas Unveiled: Exploring Desktop Imagery in the 21st Century," as they tangentially hinted at the growing cultural resonance of digital backgrounds. Perhaps, there is a subtle psychological effect wherein the prominence of GMO cotton in agricultural landscapes prompts an unconscious inclination toward digital representations of nature, echoing the whimsical connection portrayed in surrealist art.

Furthermore, our study harmonizes with the unconventional sources we encountered in our literature review, where the unexpected connections and comical revelations prepared us for the delightfully surprising correlation our study has unveiled. Considering the humorous nature of these references, one could say that our findings are as unexpected as finding a stand-up comedian in a library—yet, they add weight to the weightless notion of GMO cotton playfully whispering its aesthetics into our virtual spaces.

Our results not only offer a chuckle-worthy conundrum for the intersection of agriculture and digital life but also provoke further contemplation. They inspire us to renew our fascination with the unexpected and appreciate the harmonious humor that emerges when seemingly disparate domains coalesce.

This study affirms that scientific inquiry need not always be a dry pursuit. There can be unexpected delight in uncovering correlations that straddle the boundaries of disciplines, leaving us with a newfound appreciation for the intriguing interconnectedness of the world around us.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.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 cotton and Google searches for 'desktop background'. Make lots of 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]]
"Cotton GMO Grow, Desktop Background Glow: A Rhyme-y Study of Google Trends and Agricultural Prose"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we delved into the curious world of genetically modified cotton and its seemingly bizarre interaction with the virtual world of desktop backgrounds. With a fancy correlation coefficient of 0.9553797 and p-value less than 0.01, we journeyed from the USDA fields of cotton to the digital playground of Google searches. Our findings revealed a hilarious connection that leaves one wondering if cotton truly has a fiber-optic cable connection to our computer screens. Prepare to be amused as we uncover the unlikely correlation between GMO cotton and Google searches for 'desktop background', leaving us to ponder whether there's some secret algorithmic affinity between organic and digital cultivation.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
Introduction
As the world becomes increasingly interconnected, it is important for researchers to explore the unexpected and often humorous relationships that emerge between seemingly unrelated phenomena. In this study, we embark on a whimsical journey through the fields of agricultural biotechnology and the digital landscape of virtual imagery. Our focus is the intriguing correlation between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton production and Google searches for 'desktop background'. While at first glance, these two subjects may appear as unrelated as a cow and a keyboard, our findings shed light on a connection that can only be described as a "virtual farm to screen" phenomenon.
The cultivation of GMO cotton has been a subject of much debate and discussion, with proponents touting its potential for increased yield and pest resistance, while skeptics raise concerns about environmental impact and consumer health. Meanwhile, the world of virtual imagery and desktop backgrounds offers a colorful array of visual delights, from serene landscapes to quirky illustrations, serving as a digital canvas for personal expression and creativity. The intersection of these two seemingly disparate realms may seem as unlikely as a sheep attending a technology conference, but the data we have amassed suggests otherwise.
Our investigation has led us to delve into the realm of Google Trends, where we have observed a perplexing pattern of correlation between the adoption of GMO cotton and searches for 'desktop background'. Armed with statistical rigor and a healthy dose of humor, we aim to unravel this enigmatic connection and offer insights that are both academically enriching and delightfully amusing. Prepare to be entertained as we embark on a journey that traverses the fields of agriculture and the landscapes of cyberspace, navigating a route that is as unpredictable as a goat browsing the internet.
In the following sections, we will delve into the methodology employed, the data collected, and the statistical analysis conducted to elucidate the nature of this quirky correlation. Our findings not only open new avenues for interdisciplinary exploration but also invite a lighthearted appreciation for the unexpected whimsy that permeates the world of scientific inquiry. So, buckle up and prepare to embark on this scholarly and adventurous romp through the worlds of cotton GMOs and virtual desktop decor.

[[RESULTS]]
The statistical analysis of the data collected from 2007 to 2022 revealed a remarkable correlation between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton production and Google searches for 'desktop background'. The correlation coefficient of 0.9553797 suggests a strong positive relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables. Additionally, the r-squared value of 0.9127503 indicates that over 91% of the variability in Google searches for 'desktop background' can be explained by the use of GMO cotton, rendering this correlation not just statistically significant, but practically influential as well.
To visually illustrate this unexpected relationship, we present Figure 1, a scatterplot that graphically encapsulates the association between GMO cotton usage and Google searches for 'desktop background'. We assure you, dear reader, that this figure is not one to be cotton-picking ignored, as it provides a striking visual depiction of the uncanny connection between fields and pixels.
It is important to note that the p-value, being less than 0.01, further validates the significance of this correlation and supports the rejection of the null hypothesis that there is no association between GMO cotton use and Google searches for 'desktop background'.
Now, while this correlation may seem as outlandish as a llama at a laptop, our meticulous data collection and analysis lead us to posit that there is, indeed, a curious link between the agricultural domain and the digital realm. This unexpected finding prompts us to question whether there exists a subliminal message within the cotton fibers themselves, quietly coaxing us to adorn our computer screens with visually pleasing backgrounds.
These results not only emphasize the need for interdisciplinary exploration but also prompt a lighthearted reflection on the whimsical surprises that can emerge from scientific inquiry. The data, while initially perplexing, highlights the interconnectedness of phenomena in both agricultural and virtual landscapes, and indeed, inspires us to wonder if there may be more 'seeds' of correlation waiting to be unearthed in the fertile soil of statistical analysis.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our exploration of the correlation between genetically modified cotton usage and Google searches for 'desktop background' has unearthed a delightfully unexpected relationship that would make even the most stoic statistician smirk.

Who would have thought that the humble cotton plant, genetically modified for pest resistance and yield optimization, could have a virtual influence on the aesthetic preferences of desktop adornments? It seems that there is more to these fibers than meets the eye – they might just be whispering subliminal suggestions to our subconscious selves as we browse through an array of digital landscapes and mesmerizing designs.

Our statistically significant findings, with a correlation coefficient akin to a sturdy thread binding two disparate domains, leave us contemplating whether there's a covert alliance between the agricultural and virtual worlds, culminating in a harvest of unexpected correlation.

As we bid adieu to this study, we are left with an abiding curiosity and a chuckle at the thought of cotton fields and computer screens sharing an unseen kinship. Our data not only beckons further multidisciplinary research but also elicits a light-hearted appreciation for the whimsy that abounds in the realm of scientific inquiry.

However, it is with a straight face and a twinkle in the eye that we affirm – no further research is needed in this area. We believe we've spun this correlation into a delightful yarn, and it's time to let it weave its own humorous tapestry in the annals of scholarly exploration.

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 Cotton GMO Grow, Desktop Background Glow: A Rhyme-y Study of Google Trends and Agricultural Prose. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

Journal of Agro-Tech Trends and Linguistic Analysis

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 Cotton GMO Grow, Desktop Background Glow: A Rhyme-y Study of Google Trends and Agricultural Prose. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for Ethereal Agriculture and Rhyme-y Research

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide potential search keywords separated by commas. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide potential search keywords for a paper titled Cotton GMO Grow, Desktop Background Glow: A Rhyme-y Study of Google Trends and Agricultural Prose with an abstract of In this paper, we delved into the curious world of genetically modified cotton and its seemingly bizarre interaction with the virtual world of desktop backgrounds. With a fancy correlation coefficient of 0.9553797 and p-value less than 0.01, we journeyed from the USDA fields of cotton to the digital playground of Google searches. Our findings revealed a hilarious connection that leaves one wondering if cotton truly has a fiber-optic cable connection to our computer screens. Prepare to be amused as we uncover the unlikely correlation between GMO cotton and Google searches for 'desktop background', leaving us to ponder whether there's some secret algorithmic affinity between organic and digital cultivation.

ChatGPT:

GMO cotton, genetically modified cotton, cotton farming, cotton agriculture, Google Trends, desktop background searches, USDA cotton, correlation coefficient, p-value, fiber-optic connection, organic cultivation, digital agriculture

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

Google searches for 'desktop background'
Detailed data title: Relative volume of Google searches for 'desktop background' (Worldwide, without quotes)
Source: Google Trends
Additional Info: ^{See full details} Relative search volume (not absolute numbers)

See what else correlates with Google searches for 'desktop background'

Correlation r = 0.9553797 (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 = 0.9127503 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 91.3% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Google searches for 'desktop background') is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., GMO use in cotton) over the 16 years from 2007 through 2022.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 8.4E-9.^Show 0.0000000083895088411423640000
The p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme.^Note More specifically the p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme if we had only tested one pair of variables one time.

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

Who is going to stop me? p-value reporting doesn't require me to report how many calculations I had to go through in order to find a low p-value!
On average, you will find a correaltion as strong as 0.96 in 8.4E-7% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 119,196,489 random variables^Note You don't actually need 119 million 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 15 degrees of freedom, ^Note Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 15 because we have two variables measured over a period of 16 years. It's just the number of years minus ( the number of variables minus one ), which in this case simplifies to the number of years minus one.
you would randomly expect to find a correlation as strong as this one.

[ 0.87, 0.98 ] 95% correlation confidence interval (using the Fisher z-transformation)
^{Read more about the confidence interval} The confidence interval is an estimate the range of the value of the correlation coefficient, using the correlation itself as an input. The values are meant to be the low and high end of the correlation coefficient with 95% confidence.

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

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

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

	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016	2017	2018	2019	2020	2021	2022
GMO use in cotton (GMO cotton %)	17	18	17	15	17	14	8	5	5	4	5	3	3	5	3	3
Google searches for 'desktop background' (Rel. search volume)	81.8333	86.5	75.3333	66.1667	60.3333	54.75	46.1667	41.9167	38.8333	30.5833	26.75	23.9167	22.4167	24.75	20	22.25

Why this works

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

Try it yourself

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    return correlation, r_squared, p_value

# These are the arrays for the variables shown on this page, but you can modify them to be any two sets of numbers
array_1 = np.array([17,18,17,15,17,14,8,5,5,4,5,3,3,5,3,3,])
array_2 = np.array([81.8333,86.5,75.3333,66.1667,60.3333,54.75,46.1667,41.9167,38.8333,30.5833,26.75,23.9167,22.4167,24.75,20,22.25,])
array_1_name = "GMO use in cotton"
array_2_name = "Google searches for 'desktop background'"

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

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

Reuseable content

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

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

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

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

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

Download images for these variables:

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

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

Alternatively you can use a tool like Inkscape.
High resolution line chart, optimized for mobile
Alternative high resolution line chart
Scatterplot
Portable line chart (png)
Portable line chart (png), optimized for mobile
Line chart for only GMO use in cotton
Line chart for only Google searches for 'desktop background'
AI-generated correlation image
The spurious research paper: Cotton GMO Grow, Desktop Background Glow: A Rhyme-y Study of Google Trends and Agricultural Prose

View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

You're the correlation whisperer we needed!

Correlation ID: 1502 · Black Variable ID: 778 · Red Variable ID: 1462


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