about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #1,632 · View random

NOTICE: This correlation is inactive

Likely there is an issue with the variable data or data source.
The correlation is not active in any lists.
This page remains only to prevent link rot.


A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Air pollution in Lincoln, Nebraska and the second variable is Total revenue of the year's highest-grossing film.  The chart goes from 2001 to 2009, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As air pollution in Lincoln, Nebraska increased, people were forced to stay indoors. This led to a surge in movie streaming, ultimately driving up the total revenue of the year's highest-grossing film. Who knew that smog could lead to box office smashes!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image of a cityscape depicting Lincoln, Nebraska, with a high-tech twist. The sky should appear hazy and polluted, with smog hanging over the buildings. In the downtown area, an enormous outdoor movie screen displays the year's highest-grossing film, attracting a large crowd of people and generating substantial revenue from ticket sales and merchandise. The scene should capture the contrast between the city's poor air quality and the vibrant energy of the bustling event. 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: Poor air quality in Lincoln, Nebraska and Total revenue of the year's highest-grossing film. 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: A comic-book-style illustration with muted colors and a dotted halftone pattern from the 1960s a Polaroid photo Pop art High-tech Psychedelic
ChatGPT: Poor air quality in Lincoln, Nebraska: High-tech

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 Poor air quality in Lincoln, Nebraska and Total revenue of the year's highest-grossing film together. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In Lincoln, Nebraska, the air quality looks hazy and smoggy, with a layer of pollution hanging in the sky. At the same time, the year's highest-grossing film is displayed on a huge outdoor screen in the city's downtown area, drawing massive crowds and generating a significant amount of revenue from ticket sales and merchandise.

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: [ Poor air quality in Lincoln, Nebraska: High-tech ] and depicting this scene: In Lincoln, Nebraska, the air quality looks hazy and smoggy, with a layer of pollution hanging in the sky. At the same time, the year's highest-grossing film is displayed on a huge outdoor screen in the city's downtown area, drawing massive crowds and generating a significant amount of revenue from ticket sales and merchandise. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image of a cityscape depicting Lincoln, Nebraska, with a high-tech twist. The sky should appear hazy and polluted, with smog hanging over the buildings. In the downtown area, an enormous outdoor movie screen displays the year's highest-grossing film, attracting a large crowd of people and generating substantial revenue from ticket sales and merchandise. The scene should capture the contrast between the city's poor air quality and the vibrant energy of the bustling event.

*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 Air pollution in Lincoln, Nebraska caused Total revenue of the year's highest-grossing film to increase. Make it feel plausible.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Clear Skies, Big Bucks: The Smoggy Connection Between Air Pollution and Box Office Hits

The Journal of Environmental Economics and Cinematic Success

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 Air pollution in Lincoln, Nebraska and Total revenue of the year's highest-grossing film. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Include a pun in the title.

Your research team used data from Environmental Protection Agency and Wikipedia to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9929063 and p < 0.01 for 2001 to 2009.

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]]
"Clear Skies, Big Bucks: The Smoggy Connection Between Air Pollution and Box Office Hits"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we scrutinize the relationship between air pollution in Lincoln, Nebraska, and the total revenue of the year's highest-grossing film. Using data from the Environmental Protection Agency and Wikipedia, we embarked on a journey to gauge whether the air pollution in this heartland city could be influencing the success of blockbuster films. Our findings revealed a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.9929063 and p < 0.01 for the years 2001 to 2009. Our research not only sheds light on the unexpected influence of air quality on box office success, but also highlights the reel impact of smog on Hollywood's bottom line. This research is sure to leave readers breathless with anticipation for future findings in the world of environmental economics and film industry dynamics.


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 Air pollution in Lincoln, Nebraska and Total revenue of the year's highest-grossing film. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Clear Skies, Big Bucks: The Smoggy Connection Between Air Pollution and Box Office Hits"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we scrutinize the relationship between air pollution in Lincoln, Nebraska, and the total revenue of the year's highest-grossing film. Using data from the Environmental Protection Agency and Wikipedia, we embarked on a journey to gauge whether the air pollution in this heartland city could be influencing the success of blockbuster films. Our findings revealed a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.9929063 and p < 0.01 for the years 2001 to 2009. Our research not only sheds light on the unexpected influence of air quality on box office success, but also highlights the reel impact of smog on Hollywood's bottom line. This research is sure to leave readers breathless with anticipation for future findings in the world of environmental economics and film industry dynamics.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

Lights, camera, pollution! The Hollywood film industry has always been shrouded in mystery and intrigue, but could there be a smoggy underworld influencing its box office hits? In this study, we dive into the murky depths of air pollution and its surprising correlation with the total revenue of the year's highest-grossing film. Our journey takes us to the heartland city of Lincoln, Nebraska, where the air may be as crisp as the cornfields, but could it be playing a starring role in Hollywood's financial success?

As researchers, we are accustomed to analyzing data, but delving into the connection between ambient air quality and box office triumph was a breath of fresh air. Through meticulous data collection from the Environmental Protection Agency and Wikipedia, we set out to uncover whether there was more to the phrase "clear skies" than just an idyllic backdrop for a film's climactic scene. Little did we expect that our exploration would lead us to a correlation coefficient so staggering, it left us gasping for air (and perhaps for a sequel).

The notion that air pollution in the land of the Cornhuskers could be linked to the silver screen's financial fortunes may sound like a Hollywood plot twist, but our findings paint a compelling picture. Buckle up for a rollercoaster ride through the intersection of environmental economics and cinematic success; we guarantee it’ll be a gas!

Our research not only challenges traditional views on what influences box office hits, but it also sheds light on the unexpected ways in which the environment can influence the entertainment industry. As we unravel the reel impact of smog on Hollywood's bottom line, we invite readers to join us in this cinematic odyssey. Get your popcorn ready, because this research is sure to keep you on the edge of your seat, eagerly anticipating future discoveries in the unprecedented intersection of air quality and Hollywood dreams.


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 Air pollution in Lincoln, Nebraska and Total revenue of the year's highest-grossing film. 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. Perhaps you also got inspiration from some board games that are vaugely related.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Clear Skies, Big Bucks: The Smoggy Connection Between Air Pollution and Box Office Hits"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we scrutinize the relationship between air pollution in Lincoln, Nebraska, and the total revenue of the year's highest-grossing film. Using data from the Environmental Protection Agency and Wikipedia, we embarked on a journey to gauge whether the air pollution in this heartland city could be influencing the success of blockbuster films. Our findings revealed a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.9929063 and p < 0.01 for the years 2001 to 2009. Our research not only sheds light on the unexpected influence of air quality on box office success, but also highlights the reel impact of smog on Hollywood's bottom line. This research is sure to leave readers breathless with anticipation for future findings in the world of environmental economics and film industry dynamics.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
Lights, camera, pollution! The Hollywood film industry has always been shrouded in mystery and intrigue, but could there be a smoggy underworld influencing its box office hits? In this study, we dive into the murky depths of air pollution and its surprising correlation with the total revenue of the year's highest-grossing film. Our journey takes us to the heartland city of Lincoln, Nebraska, where the air may be as crisp as the cornfields, but could it be playing a starring role in Hollywood's financial success?
As researchers, we are accustomed to analyzing data, but delving into the connection between ambient air quality and box office triumph was a breath of fresh air. Through meticulous data collection from the Environmental Protection Agency and Wikipedia, we set out to uncover whether there was more to the phrase "clear skies" than just an idyllic backdrop for a film's climactic scene. Little did we expect that our exploration would lead us to a correlation coefficient so staggering, it left us gasping for air (and perhaps for a sequel).
The notion that air pollution in the land of the Cornhuskers could be linked to the silver screen's financial fortunes may sound like a Hollywood plot twist, but our findings paint a compelling picture. Buckle up for a rollercoaster ride through the intersection of environmental economics and cinematic success; we guarantee it’ll be a gas!
Our research not only challenges traditional views on what influences box office hits, but it also sheds light on the unexpected ways in which the environment can influence the entertainment industry. As we unravel the reel impact of smog on Hollywood's bottom line, we invite readers to join us in this cinematic odyssey. Get your popcorn ready, because this research is sure to keep you on the edge of your seat, eagerly anticipating future discoveries in the unprecedented intersection of air quality and Hollywood dreams.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

In "The Effects of Air Pollution on Economic Indicators," Smith et al. delve into the intricate web of how air pollution can impact various economic factors. Their findings highlight the substantial influence that air quality can have on financial metrics, providing a solid foundation for the examination of the correlation between air pollution and box office revenue.

Doe's work, "Air Quality and Its Societal Impact," further underscores the wide-reaching implications of air pollution. However, while these serious studies provide a vital backdrop for our own research, they fail to capture the sheer magnitude of the smoggy saga we are about to unravel.

Taking a literary turn, "The Lorax" by Dr. Seuss, although a classic children's tale, serves as an allegorical account of the devastating impact of environmental degradation. With a narrative populated by colorful characters like the Once-ler and the Truffula Trees, it underscores the importance of environmental stewardship. Who knew a cautionary tale about a mysterious creature could foreshadow the ecological implications of air pollution on Hollywood's financial skyline?

On a more speculative note, "The Great Gatsby" by F. Scott Fitzgerald offers a window into the opulent extravagance of the roaring '20s. While seemingly unrelated, the glitz and glamour depicted in this timeless novel beg the question: Could the allure of a bygone era be mirrored in the silver screen's financial prowess, even amidst a smoggy backdrop? Perhaps there's more to the green light at the end of the dock than meets the eye – could it be a metaphor for box office success amidst polluted skies?

In a surprise twist, "Clue" – the classic board game – provides a playful analogy for the mystery we are unraveling. Just as players must deduce the culprit, weapon, and location of a crime, we too are piecing together the unlikely suspects contributing to the success of Hollywood blockbusters. Could air pollution be the unexpected weapon in the box office battle, or is it merely a red herring in the grand scheme of cinematic conquest?

As we navigate through this medley of scholarly works, whimsical stories, and board game analogies, it is evident that our research goes beyond the conventional bounds of economic and environmental analyses. Through this eclectic mix, we lay the groundwork for a truly unprecedented exploration of the smoggy connection between air pollution in Lincoln, Nebraska, and the champagne wishes and caviar dreams of Hollywood's highest-grossing films.


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 Air pollution in Lincoln, Nebraska and Total revenue of the year's highest-grossing film. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Environmental Protection Agency and Wikipedia . You used data from 2001 to 2009

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]]
"Clear Skies, Big Bucks: The Smoggy Connection Between Air Pollution and Box Office Hits"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we scrutinize the relationship between air pollution in Lincoln, Nebraska, and the total revenue of the year's highest-grossing film. Using data from the Environmental Protection Agency and Wikipedia, we embarked on a journey to gauge whether the air pollution in this heartland city could be influencing the success of blockbuster films. Our findings revealed a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.9929063 and p < 0.01 for the years 2001 to 2009. Our research not only sheds light on the unexpected influence of air quality on box office success, but also highlights the reel impact of smog on Hollywood's bottom line. This research is sure to leave readers breathless with anticipation for future findings in the world of environmental economics and film industry dynamics.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
Lights, camera, pollution! The Hollywood film industry has always been shrouded in mystery and intrigue, but could there be a smoggy underworld influencing its box office hits? In this study, we dive into the murky depths of air pollution and its surprising correlation with the total revenue of the year's highest-grossing film. Our journey takes us to the heartland city of Lincoln, Nebraska, where the air may be as crisp as the cornfields, but could it be playing a starring role in Hollywood's financial success?
As researchers, we are accustomed to analyzing data, but delving into the connection between ambient air quality and box office triumph was a breath of fresh air. Through meticulous data collection from the Environmental Protection Agency and Wikipedia, we set out to uncover whether there was more to the phrase "clear skies" than just an idyllic backdrop for a film's climactic scene. Little did we expect that our exploration would lead us to a correlation coefficient so staggering, it left us gasping for air (and perhaps for a sequel).
The notion that air pollution in the land of the Cornhuskers could be linked to the silver screen's financial fortunes may sound like a Hollywood plot twist, but our findings paint a compelling picture. Buckle up for a rollercoaster ride through the intersection of environmental economics and cinematic success; we guarantee it’ll be a gas!
Our research not only challenges traditional views on what influences box office hits, but it also sheds light on the unexpected ways in which the environment can influence the entertainment industry. As we unravel the reel impact of smog on Hollywood's bottom line, we invite readers to join us in this cinematic odyssey. Get your popcorn ready, because this research is sure to keep you on the edge of your seat, eagerly anticipating future discoveries in the unprecedented intersection of air quality and Hollywood dreams.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To tackle the intriguing relationship between air pollution in Lincoln, Nebraska, and the total revenue of the year's highest-grossing film, our research team underwent an adventure akin to a suspenseful blockbuster film. With a twinkle in our eyes and a cloud of curiosity hanging over us, we embarked on a data collection mission that would make even the most eagle-eyed detective envious.

Data Collection: Our trusty companions in this epic quest were none other than the Environmental Protection Agency and the treasure trove of knowledge that is Wikipedia. Deftly skimming through a plethora of EPA reports and engaging in a delicate dance with Wikipedia’s tables and summaries, we gallantly gathered air pollution data from 2001 to 2009 – a time period that promised us an exciting narrative full of plot twists and turns.

Air Pollution Metrics: Armed with a determination that could rival any hero's noble quest, we utilized measures of air pollution, including particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) and ozone concentrations. We navigated through the dense fog of scientific jargon to extract the crucial data, all while keeping an eye out for any surprises that might be lurking in the shadows.

Film Revenue Data: Turning our attention to the glitzy world of Hollywood, we gleaned data on the total revenue of the year's highest-grossing film during the same time frame. Our examination of box office successes had us feeling like film critics and financial analysts rolled into one.

Correlation Analysis: With our pockets full of data, we turned to the trusty statistical tools in our arsenal. Armed with correlation analysis, we dissected the relationship between air pollution and box office earnings, eager to uncover the hidden nuances and potential blockbuster-worthy revelations.

Interdisciplinary Lens: We would be remiss if we didn't acknowledge the constellation of interdisciplinary perspectives that guided our research. Drawing from the worlds of environmental economics and film industry dynamics, we sought to blend seemingly disparate fields into a harmonious narrative that would captivate academic minds and Hollywood enthusiasts alike.

Data Integrity: To ensure the stability and robustness of our findings, we scrutinized our data with a critical gaze, ferreting out any anomalies or inconsistencies that dared to cast doubt on our cinematic hypothesis. Our dedication to data integrity was unwavering, much like an unyielding hero facing the formidable forces of uncertainty.

In this multi-faceted adventure, our methodology aimed to transcend traditional research approaches, infusing rigor with a touch of theatrical flair. Our findings, shaped by the intertwining forces of air pollution and box office triumphs, promise to shine a spotlight on the unexpected interactions between environmental factors and the entertainment industry. So sit back, grab your popcorn, and get ready for a journey through the smog-laden landscapes of Lincoln, Nebraska, and the glimmering lights of Hollywood.


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 Air pollution in Lincoln, Nebraska and Total revenue of the year's highest-grossing film. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Environmental Protection Agency and Wikipedia .

For the time period 2001 to 2009, you found a correlation 0.9929063, r-squared of 0.9858629, 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]]
"Clear Skies, Big Bucks: The Smoggy Connection Between Air Pollution and Box Office Hits"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we scrutinize the relationship between air pollution in Lincoln, Nebraska, and the total revenue of the year's highest-grossing film. Using data from the Environmental Protection Agency and Wikipedia, we embarked on a journey to gauge whether the air pollution in this heartland city could be influencing the success of blockbuster films. Our findings revealed a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.9929063 and p < 0.01 for the years 2001 to 2009. Our research not only sheds light on the unexpected influence of air quality on box office success, but also highlights the reel impact of smog on Hollywood's bottom line. This research is sure to leave readers breathless with anticipation for future findings in the world of environmental economics and film industry dynamics.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
Lights, camera, pollution! The Hollywood film industry has always been shrouded in mystery and intrigue, but could there be a smoggy underworld influencing its box office hits? In this study, we dive into the murky depths of air pollution and its surprising correlation with the total revenue of the year's highest-grossing film. Our journey takes us to the heartland city of Lincoln, Nebraska, where the air may be as crisp as the cornfields, but could it be playing a starring role in Hollywood's financial success?
As researchers, we are accustomed to analyzing data, but delving into the connection between ambient air quality and box office triumph was a breath of fresh air. Through meticulous data collection from the Environmental Protection Agency and Wikipedia, we set out to uncover whether there was more to the phrase "clear skies" than just an idyllic backdrop for a film's climactic scene. Little did we expect that our exploration would lead us to a correlation coefficient so staggering, it left us gasping for air (and perhaps for a sequel).
The notion that air pollution in the land of the Cornhuskers could be linked to the silver screen's financial fortunes may sound like a Hollywood plot twist, but our findings paint a compelling picture. Buckle up for a rollercoaster ride through the intersection of environmental economics and cinematic success; we guarantee it’ll be a gas!
Our research not only challenges traditional views on what influences box office hits, but it also sheds light on the unexpected ways in which the environment can influence the entertainment industry. As we unravel the reel impact of smog on Hollywood's bottom line, we invite readers to join us in this cinematic odyssey. Get your popcorn ready, because this research is sure to keep you on the edge of your seat, eagerly anticipating future discoveries in the unprecedented intersection of air quality and Hollywood dreams.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The results of our analysis unveiled a tantalizing connection between air pollution in Lincoln, Nebraska and the total revenue of the year's highest-grossing film. After meticulously crunching the numbers, we found a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9929063, indicating a striking positive relationship. The calculated r-squared value of 0.9858629 further corroborates the robustness of this association, leaving us in awe of the smog's potential impact on Hollywood's megabucks.

In our scatterplot (Fig. 1), the relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables is on full display. However, it's important to note that our findings may leave some scratching their heads, much like a perplexing movie plot twist. Who would have thought that the air quality of a Midwestern city could hold the key to unlocking the financial success of Tinseltown's blockbusters?

This unearthed correlation between air pollution in Lincoln and Hollywood's box office triumphs certainly gives new meaning to the phrase "pollution control." While we expected to uncover interesting results, the strength of this link left us with our jaws dropped – much like the dramatic reveal in a suspense thriller.

It's clear that the environmental conditions in Lincoln, Nebraska have a leading role to play in the financial performance of the film industry, challenging conventional wisdom about the factors influencing Hollywood's success. Our research has cast a spotlight on the reel impact of smog on the movie meter, leaving us breathless with anticipation for future discoveries in this groundbreaking intersection of environmental economics and cinematic success.

In the words of the classic movie line, "Here's looking at (you), 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 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 Air pollution in Lincoln, Nebraska and Total revenue of the year's highest-grossing film. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Limit your response to 500 tokens.

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

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

[[TITLE]]
"Clear Skies, Big Bucks: The Smoggy Connection Between Air Pollution and Box Office Hits"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we scrutinize the relationship between air pollution in Lincoln, Nebraska, and the total revenue of the year's highest-grossing film. Using data from the Environmental Protection Agency and Wikipedia, we embarked on a journey to gauge whether the air pollution in this heartland city could be influencing the success of blockbuster films. Our findings revealed a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.9929063 and p < 0.01 for the years 2001 to 2009. Our research not only sheds light on the unexpected influence of air quality on box office success, but also highlights the reel impact of smog on Hollywood's bottom line. This research is sure to leave readers breathless with anticipation for future findings in the world of environmental economics and film industry dynamics.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
In "The Effects of Air Pollution on Economic Indicators," Smith et al. delve into the intricate web of how air pollution can impact various economic factors. Their findings highlight the substantial influence that air quality can have on financial metrics, providing a solid foundation for the examination of the correlation between air pollution and box office revenue.
Doe's work, "Air Quality and Its Societal Impact," further underscores the wide-reaching implications of air pollution. However, while these serious studies provide a vital backdrop for our own research, they fail to capture the sheer magnitude of the smoggy saga we are about to unravel.
Taking a literary turn, "The Lorax" by Dr. Seuss, although a classic children's tale, serves as an allegorical account of the devastating impact of environmental degradation. With a narrative populated by colorful characters like the Once-ler and the Truffula Trees, it underscores the importance of environmental stewardship. Who knew a cautionary tale about a mysterious creature could foreshadow the ecological implications of air pollution on Hollywood's financial skyline?
On a more speculative note, "The Great Gatsby" by F. Scott Fitzgerald offers a window into the opulent extravagance of the roaring '20s. While seemingly unrelated, the glitz and glamour depicted in this timeless novel beg the question: Could the allure of a bygone era be mirrored in the silver screen's financial prowess, even amidst a smoggy backdrop? Perhaps there's more to the green light at the end of the dock than meets the eye – could it be a metaphor for box office success amidst polluted skies?
In a surprise twist, "Clue" – the classic board game – provides a playful analogy for the mystery we are unraveling. Just as players must deduce the culprit, weapon, and location of a crime, we too are piecing together the unlikely suspects contributing to the success of Hollywood blockbusters. Could air pollution be the unexpected weapon in the box office battle, or is it merely a red herring in the grand scheme of cinematic conquest?
As we navigate through this medley of scholarly works, whimsical stories, and board game analogies, it is evident that our research goes beyond the conventional bounds of economic and environmental analyses. Through this eclectic mix, we lay the groundwork for a truly unprecedented exploration of the smoggy connection between air pollution in Lincoln, Nebraska, and the champagne wishes and caviar dreams of Hollywood's highest-grossing films.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our analysis unveiled a tantalizing connection between air pollution in Lincoln, Nebraska and the total revenue of the year's highest-grossing film. After meticulously crunching the numbers, we found a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9929063, indicating a striking positive relationship. The calculated r-squared value of 0.9858629 further corroborates the robustness of this association, leaving us in awe of the smog's potential impact on Hollywood's megabucks.
In our scatterplot (Fig. 1), the relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables is on full display. However, it's important to note that our findings may leave some scratching their heads, much like a perplexing movie plot twist. Who would have thought that the air quality of a Midwestern city could hold the key to unlocking the financial success of Tinseltown's blockbusters?
This unearthed correlation between air pollution in Lincoln and Hollywood's box office triumphs certainly gives new meaning to the phrase "pollution control." While we expected to uncover interesting results, the strength of this link left us with our jaws dropped – much like the dramatic reveal in a suspense thriller.
It's clear that the environmental conditions in Lincoln, Nebraska have a leading role to play in the financial performance of the film industry, challenging conventional wisdom about the factors influencing Hollywood's success. Our research has cast a spotlight on the reel impact of smog on the movie meter, leaving us breathless with anticipation for future discoveries in this groundbreaking intersection of environmental economics and cinematic success.
In the words of the classic movie line, "Here's looking at (you), correlation!"

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Our investigation into the smoggy saga of air pollution in Lincoln, Nebraska and its unexpected connection to the glitz and glamour of Hollywood's box office bonanzas has left us as astounded as a surprise plot twist in a Hitchcock film. Building upon the foundation laid by prior research, our results uncovered a correlation coefficient that would make even the most jaded statistician raise an eyebrow – a whopping 0.9929063, with a p-value less than 0.01.

The serious work of Smith et al. and Doe provided the scholarly backdrop for our own research, but it was the whimsical musings of Dr. Seuss's "The Lorax" and the lavish escapades of F. Scott Fitzgerald's "The Great Gatsby" that added unexpected dimensions to our investigation. Who could have fathomed that the Once-ler's cautionary tale and the green light at the end of Daisy's dock would provide insight into the intersection of environmental economics and Hollywood's financial landscape?

With our results in hand, we can confidently assert that the allure of a bygone era, much like Gatsby's extravagant parties, seems to find a parallel in the box office triumphs of Hollywood amidst the seemingly murky skies of Lincoln. Just as players deduce the weapon and culprit in "Clue," we too have pieced together an unlikely correlation that points to air pollution as an unexpected player in the cinematic conquest of Tinseltown.

Our scatterplot visibly showcases this remarkable relationship, leaving us in awe of the smog's potential impact on Hollywood's megabucks. It's analogous to finding the plot twist in a movie we thought we had all figured out – a twist that has us reeling with the tantalizing implications for the film industry.

In essence, our findings not only confirm but also amplify the conclusions drawn by prior research. The smoggy connection we have unveiled challenges conventional wisdom about the factors influencing Hollywood's economic performance, all the while leaving us breathless with anticipation for the next act in this fascinating confluence of ecology and entertainment.

As cinematic buff Rick Blaine said, "Here's looking at (you), correlation!" Indeed, our research has cast a spotlight on the reel impact of smog on the movie meter, leaving us eager for the sequel in this groundbreaking saga of environmental economics and cinematic success.


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 Air pollution in Lincoln, Nebraska and Total revenue of the year's highest-grossing film. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
"Clear Skies, Big Bucks: The Smoggy Connection Between Air Pollution and Box Office Hits"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we scrutinize the relationship between air pollution in Lincoln, Nebraska, and the total revenue of the year's highest-grossing film. Using data from the Environmental Protection Agency and Wikipedia, we embarked on a journey to gauge whether the air pollution in this heartland city could be influencing the success of blockbuster films. Our findings revealed a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.9929063 and p < 0.01 for the years 2001 to 2009. Our research not only sheds light on the unexpected influence of air quality on box office success, but also highlights the reel impact of smog on Hollywood's bottom line. This research is sure to leave readers breathless with anticipation for future findings in the world of environmental economics and film industry dynamics.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
Lights, camera, pollution! The Hollywood film industry has always been shrouded in mystery and intrigue, but could there be a smoggy underworld influencing its box office hits? In this study, we dive into the murky depths of air pollution and its surprising correlation with the total revenue of the year's highest-grossing film. Our journey takes us to the heartland city of Lincoln, Nebraska, where the air may be as crisp as the cornfields, but could it be playing a starring role in Hollywood's financial success?
As researchers, we are accustomed to analyzing data, but delving into the connection between ambient air quality and box office triumph was a breath of fresh air. Through meticulous data collection from the Environmental Protection Agency and Wikipedia, we set out to uncover whether there was more to the phrase "clear skies" than just an idyllic backdrop for a film's climactic scene. Little did we expect that our exploration would lead us to a correlation coefficient so staggering, it left us gasping for air (and perhaps for a sequel).
The notion that air pollution in the land of the Cornhuskers could be linked to the silver screen's financial fortunes may sound like a Hollywood plot twist, but our findings paint a compelling picture. Buckle up for a rollercoaster ride through the intersection of environmental economics and cinematic success; we guarantee it’ll be a gas!
Our research not only challenges traditional views on what influences box office hits, but it also sheds light on the unexpected ways in which the environment can influence the entertainment industry. As we unravel the reel impact of smog on Hollywood's bottom line, we invite readers to join us in this cinematic odyssey. Get your popcorn ready, because this research is sure to keep you on the edge of your seat, eagerly anticipating future discoveries in the unprecedented intersection of air quality and Hollywood dreams.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our analysis unveiled a tantalizing connection between air pollution in Lincoln, Nebraska and the total revenue of the year's highest-grossing film. After meticulously crunching the numbers, we found a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9929063, indicating a striking positive relationship. The calculated r-squared value of 0.9858629 further corroborates the robustness of this association, leaving us in awe of the smog's potential impact on Hollywood's megabucks.
In our scatterplot (Fig. 1), the relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables is on full display. However, it's important to note that our findings may leave some scratching their heads, much like a perplexing movie plot twist. Who would have thought that the air quality of a Midwestern city could hold the key to unlocking the financial success of Tinseltown's blockbusters?
This unearthed correlation between air pollution in Lincoln and Hollywood's box office triumphs certainly gives new meaning to the phrase "pollution control." While we expected to uncover interesting results, the strength of this link left us with our jaws dropped – much like the dramatic reveal in a suspense thriller.
It's clear that the environmental conditions in Lincoln, Nebraska have a leading role to play in the financial performance of the film industry, challenging conventional wisdom about the factors influencing Hollywood's success. Our research has cast a spotlight on the reel impact of smog on the movie meter, leaving us breathless with anticipation for future discoveries in this groundbreaking intersection of environmental economics and cinematic success.
In the words of the classic movie line, "Here's looking at (you), correlation!"

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our study has uncovered a surprising and compelling relationship between air pollution in Lincoln, Nebraska and the total revenue of the year's highest-grossing film. The strong correlation coefficient we observed not only left us gasping for air but also raised eyebrows, like the unexpected plot twist in a blockbuster movie. It seems that the smog in the air is not the only thing fogging up Hollywood's financial success!

Our findings suggest that the ambiance in the Cornhusker State may have more impact on box office hits than previously thought. Who would have guessed that the air quality in the heartland could have such a reel impact on Tinseltown's bottom line? It's like a real-life David and Goliath story, with the quaint town of Lincoln going head-to-head with the glitz and glamour of Hollywood.

As we wrap up this cinematic odyssey of environmental economics and film industry dynamics, it's clear that our research has paved the way for a breath of fresh air in academia. However, the staggering correlation coefficient and robust r-squared value we unearthed indicate that no more research is needed in this area. It seems we've hit the jackpot with our findings, and any further investigation would just be spitting in the wind!


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 Clear Skies, Big Bucks: The Smoggy Connection Between Air Pollution and Box Office Hits. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Environmental Economics and Cinematic Success


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 Clear Skies, Big Bucks: The Smoggy Connection Between Air Pollution and Box Office Hits. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for Atmospheric Entertainment 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 Clear Skies, Big Bucks: The Smoggy Connection Between Air Pollution and Box Office Hits with an abstract of In this study, we scrutinize the relationship between air pollution in Lincoln, Nebraska, and the total revenue of the year's highest-grossing film. Using data from the Environmental Protection Agency and Wikipedia, we embarked on a journey to gauge whether the air pollution in this heartland city could be influencing the success of blockbuster films. Our findings revealed a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.9929063 and p < 0.01 for the years 2001 to 2009. Our research not only sheds light on the unexpected influence of air quality on box office success, but also highlights the reel impact of smog on Hollywood's bottom line. This research is sure to leave readers breathless with anticipation for future findings in the world of environmental economics and film industry dynamics.

ChatGPT:

air pollution, box office hits, film revenue, smog impact, air quality, Hollywood success, environmental economics, Lincoln Nebraska, blockbuster films, EPA data, correlation coefficient, film industry dynamics

*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

Air pollution in Lincoln, Nebraska
Detailed data title: Percentage of days 'unhealthy' or worse air quality in Lincoln, NE
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
See what else correlates with Air pollution in Lincoln, Nebraska

Total revenue of the year's highest-grossing film
Source: Wikipedia
See what else correlates with Total revenue of the year's highest-grossing film

Correlation r = 0.9929063 (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 = 0.9858629 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 98.6% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Total revenue of the year's highest-grossing film) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Air pollution in Lincoln, Nebraska) over the 9 years from 2001 through 2009.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 9.8E-8. 0.0000000983097883921961700000
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 0.99 in 9.8E-6% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 10,171,927 random variables You don't actually need 10 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 8 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 8 because we have two variables measured over a period of 9 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.

[ 0.97, 1 ] 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.
200120022003200420052006200720082009
Air pollution in Lincoln, Nebraska (Bad air quality days)000000000.547945
Total revenue of the year's highest-grossing film (Dollars per Barrel)9747550009260470001119930000919839000896911000106618000096342000010045600002782280000




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.
  4. Very low n: There are not many data points included in this analysis. Even if the p-value is high, we should be suspicious of using so few datapoints in a correlation.
  5. Y-axis doesn't start at zero: I truncated the Y-axes of the graph above. I also used a line graph, which makes the visual connection stand out more than it deserves. Nothing against line graphs. They are great at telling a story when you have linear data! But visually it is deceptive because the only data is at the points on the graph, not the lines on the graph. In between each point, the data could have been doing anything. Like going for a random walk by itself!
    Mathematically what I showed is true, but it is intentionally misleading. Below is the same chart but with both Y-axes starting at zero.




Try it yourself

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

    return correlation, r_squared, p_value

# These are the arrays for the variables shown on this page, but you can modify them to be any two sets of numbers
array_1 = np.array([0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0.547945,])
array_2 = np.array([974755000,926047000,1119930000,919839000,896911000,1066180000,963420000,1004560000,2782280000,])
array_1_name = "Air pollution in Lincoln, Nebraska"
array_2_name = "Total revenue of the year's highest-grossing film"

# 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?

I'm grateful for your review!


Correlation ID: 1632 · Black Variable ID: 20824 · Red Variable ID: 61
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0