about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #1,997 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Annual US household spending on meats, poultry, fish, and eggs and the second variable is Season wins for the Buffalo Bills.  The chart goes from 2000 to 2022, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As household spending on meats, poultry, fish, and eggs increased, the rise in consumption led to a surge in fans embracing their inner “Buffalo Wild Wings,” creating a cluckin' good game day atmosphere. This bolstered the team spirit and egg-cited the players, ultimately leading to a victorious season for the Buffalo Bills. It was truly a case of poultry in motion leading to pigskin success.

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image of a cozy kitchen scene with a Buffalo Bills calendar hanging on the wall, marked with checkmarks for the team's season wins. Show a countertop displaying succulent meats, poultry, fish, and a carton of fresh eggs, representing annual US household spending on these items. The lighting should be warm and inviting, evoking a sense of comfort and contentment. 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: Annual US household spending on meats, poultry, fish, and eggs and Season wins for the Buffalo Bills. 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 Discovery magazine cover image Sci-fi fantacy Steampunk Futuristic Oragami
ChatGPT: A Discovery 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 Annual US household spending on meats, poultry, fish, and eggs and Season wins for the Buffalo Bills together. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a cozy kitchen, a Buffalo Bills calendar hangs on the wall, marking the team's season wins with small checkmarks. On the countertop, a spread of succulent meats, poultry, fish, and a carton of fresh eggs are displayed, representing annual US household spending on these items.

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 Discovery magazine cover image ] and depicting this scene: In a cozy kitchen, a Buffalo Bills calendar hangs on the wall, marking the team's season wins with small checkmarks. On the countertop, a spread of succulent meats, poultry, fish, and a carton of fresh eggs are displayed, representing annual US household spending on these items. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image of a cozy kitchen scene with a Buffalo Bills calendar hanging on the wall, marked with checkmarks for the team's season wins. Show a countertop displaying succulent meats, poultry, fish, and a carton of fresh eggs, representing annual US household spending on these items. The lighting should be warm and inviting, evoking a sense of comfort and contentment.

*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 Annual US household spending on meats, poultry, fish, and eggs caused Season wins for the Buffalo Bills to increase.\Make it sound serious until the end.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Meat Expenditure and Marvellous Matches: Mapping the Interplay between Annual US Household Spending on Meats, Poultry, Fish, and Eggs and Season Wins for the Buffalo Bills

The Journal of Culinary Economics and Sports Analysis

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 silly researcher writing an academic paper.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 Annual US household spending on meats, poultry, fish, and eggs and Season wins for the Buffalo Bills. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Make the title an alliteration.

Your research team used data from Bureau of Labor Statistics and Pro-Football-Reference.com to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.8073380 and p < 0.01 for 2000 to 2022.

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

[[TITLE]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit

[[ABSTRACT]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit



ChatGPT:
[[TITLE]]
Meat Expenditure and Marvellous Matches: Mapping the Interplay between Annual US Household Spending on Meats, Poultry, Fish, and Eggs and Season Wins for the Buffalo Bills

[[ABSTRACT]]
The interplay between annual US household spending on meats, poultry, fish, and eggs and the season wins for the Buffalo Bills has long intrigued researchers and football enthusiasts alike. In this study, we utilized data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Pro-Football-Reference.com to unravel the enigmatic correlation between these seemingly disparate variables. Our findings revealed a robust correlation coefficient of 0.8073380 with a p-value of less than 0.01 for the years spanning from 2000 to 2022. While we tread cautiously in inferring causation from correlation, the statistically significant relationship prompts thought-provoking musings on the potential influence of protein preferences on gridiron glory. Our data analysis leaves one pondering whether "beefing up" household meat expenditures might just inadvertently "beef up" the Bills' chance of clinching triumph on the field. This study adds a quirky yet intriguing dimension to the discourse surrounding consumer behavior and sports outcomes, offering a light-hearted take on the serious world of statistical analysis.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly researcher writing an academic paper.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 Annual US household spending on meats, poultry, fish, and eggs and Season wins for the Buffalo Bills. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Meat Expenditure and Marvellous Matches: Mapping the Interplay between Annual US Household Spending on Meats, Poultry, Fish, and Eggs and Season Wins for the Buffalo Bills

[[ABSTRACT]]
The interplay between annual US household spending on meats, poultry, fish, and eggs and the season wins for the Buffalo Bills has long intrigued researchers and football enthusiasts alike. In this study, we utilized data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Pro-Football-Reference.com to unravel the enigmatic correlation between these seemingly disparate variables. Our findings revealed a robust correlation coefficient of 0.8073380 with a p-value of less than 0.01 for the years spanning from 2000 to 2022. While we tread cautiously in inferring causation from correlation, the statistically significant relationship prompts thought-provoking musings on the potential influence of protein preferences on gridiron glory. Our data analysis leaves one pondering whether "beefing up" household meat expenditures might just inadvertently "beef up" the Bills' chance of clinching triumph on the field. This study adds a quirky yet intriguing dimension to the discourse surrounding consumer behavior and sports outcomes, offering a light-hearted take on the serious world of statistical analysis.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

The world of sports and consumer behavior intersects in puzzling and unpredictable ways, offering a bizarre yet irresistible playground for researchers seeking to unravel the enigmatic connections between seemingly unrelated variables. In this study, we set our sights on the curious case of annual US household spending on meats, poultry, fish, and eggs and its peculiar dance with the season wins for the Buffalo Bills. We dive into this peculiar nexus armed with data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Pro-Football-Reference.com, prepared to confront the unknown with statistical rigor and a dash of whimsy.

As we embark on this scholarly escapade, it is imperative to acknowledge the sheer audacity of our quest. Who would have thought that the carnivorous choices of households across the nation could hold sway over the gridiron battles of a professional football team? It's a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside a pigskin, and we are eager to decipher its splendid absurdity.

The financial stakes are as high as the excitement of a sudden death overtime, with billions of dollars coursing through the realms of meat consumption and sporting fervor. Yet, amidst this seriousness, we embark on our journey with a twinkle in our eyes and a sprinkle of statistical fairy dust, casting an enchanting light on the serendipitous confluence of meaty indulgence and touchdown triumphs.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly researcher writing an academic paper.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 Annual US household spending on meats, poultry, fish, and eggs and Season wins for the Buffalo Bills. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

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

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then name a few real TV shows that sound like they might be relevant to the topic that you watched as research.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Meat Expenditure and Marvellous Matches: Mapping the Interplay between Annual US Household Spending on Meats, Poultry, Fish, and Eggs and Season Wins for the Buffalo Bills

[[ABSTRACT]]
The interplay between annual US household spending on meats, poultry, fish, and eggs and the season wins for the Buffalo Bills has long intrigued researchers and football enthusiasts alike. In this study, we utilized data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Pro-Football-Reference.com to unravel the enigmatic correlation between these seemingly disparate variables. Our findings revealed a robust correlation coefficient of 0.8073380 with a p-value of less than 0.01 for the years spanning from 2000 to 2022. While we tread cautiously in inferring causation from correlation, the statistically significant relationship prompts thought-provoking musings on the potential influence of protein preferences on gridiron glory. Our data analysis leaves one pondering whether "beefing up" household meat expenditures might just inadvertently "beef up" the Bills' chance of clinching triumph on the field. This study adds a quirky yet intriguing dimension to the discourse surrounding consumer behavior and sports outcomes, offering a light-hearted take on the serious world of statistical analysis.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The world of sports and consumer behavior intersects in puzzling and unpredictable ways, offering a bizarre yet irresistible playground for researchers seeking to unravel the enigmatic connections between seemingly unrelated variables. In this study, we set our sights on the curious case of annual US household spending on meats, poultry, fish, and eggs and its peculiar dance with the season wins for the Buffalo Bills. We dive into this peculiar nexus armed with data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Pro-Football-Reference.com, prepared to confront the unknown with statistical rigor and a dash of whimsy.
As we embark on this scholarly escapade, it is imperative to acknowledge the sheer audacity of our quest. Who would have thought that the carnivorous choices of households across the nation could hold sway over the gridiron battles of a professional football team? It's a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside a pigskin, and we are eager to decipher its splendid absurdity.
The financial stakes are as high as the excitement of a sudden death overtime, with billions of dollars coursing through the realms of meat consumption and sporting fervor. Yet, amidst this seriousness, we embark on our journey with a twinkle in our eyes and a sprinkle of statistical fairy dust, casting an enchanting light on the serendipitous confluence of meaty indulgence and touchdown triumphs.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The study of the perplexing correlation between annual US household spending on meats, poultry, fish, and eggs, and the seasonal victories of the Buffalo Bills has attracted widespread attention from researchers, economists, and football aficionados alike. Smith et al. (2015) found a statistically significant positive association between red meat consumption and increased sports team performance, laying the groundwork for our current investigation. In "Doe," the authors explore the societal impact of meat consumption, shedding light on the potential influence of dietary choices on broader cultural phenomena.

Turning to the realm of literary inquiry, "Eating Animals" by Jonathan Safran Foer and "The Omnivore's Dilemma" by Michael Pollan offer profound insights into the intricate relationship between human dietary habits and their broader implications. Deep in the fictional canon, "The Catcher in the Rye" by J.D. Salinger and "To Kill a Mockingbird" by Harper Lee, though not overtly related to our study, remind us of the unpredictable connections that may exist between seemingly disparate elements.

Drawing further inspiration from popular culture, "Man vs. Food" and "Diners, Drive-Ins, and Dives" serve as lighthearted yet surprisingly informative sources, offering a feast of gastronomic explorations that may inform our understanding of household spending habits and, by extension, football triumphs. These unconventional yet intriguing references pique our interest in uncovering the whimsical undercurrents beneath the seemingly serious façade of statistical analysis.

As we wade deeper into this intertwining tapestry of consumer behavior and athletic prowess, we cannot discount the possibility of serendipitous interactions and hidden variables that lie beneath the surface, waiting to be unearthed with a whimsical wave of the data wand.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly researcher writing an academic paper.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 Annual US household spending on meats, poultry, fish, and eggs and Season wins for the Buffalo Bills. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Bureau of Labor Statistics and Pro-Football-Reference.com . You used data from 2000 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]]
Meat Expenditure and Marvellous Matches: Mapping the Interplay between Annual US Household Spending on Meats, Poultry, Fish, and Eggs and Season Wins for the Buffalo Bills

[[ABSTRACT]]
The interplay between annual US household spending on meats, poultry, fish, and eggs and the season wins for the Buffalo Bills has long intrigued researchers and football enthusiasts alike. In this study, we utilized data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Pro-Football-Reference.com to unravel the enigmatic correlation between these seemingly disparate variables. Our findings revealed a robust correlation coefficient of 0.8073380 with a p-value of less than 0.01 for the years spanning from 2000 to 2022. While we tread cautiously in inferring causation from correlation, the statistically significant relationship prompts thought-provoking musings on the potential influence of protein preferences on gridiron glory. Our data analysis leaves one pondering whether "beefing up" household meat expenditures might just inadvertently "beef up" the Bills' chance of clinching triumph on the field. This study adds a quirky yet intriguing dimension to the discourse surrounding consumer behavior and sports outcomes, offering a light-hearted take on the serious world of statistical analysis.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
The world of sports and consumer behavior intersects in puzzling and unpredictable ways, offering a bizarre yet irresistible playground for researchers seeking to unravel the enigmatic connections between seemingly unrelated variables. In this study, we set our sights on the curious case of annual US household spending on meats, poultry, fish, and eggs and its peculiar dance with the season wins for the Buffalo Bills. We dive into this peculiar nexus armed with data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Pro-Football-Reference.com, prepared to confront the unknown with statistical rigor and a dash of whimsy.
As we embark on this scholarly escapade, it is imperative to acknowledge the sheer audacity of our quest. Who would have thought that the carnivorous choices of households across the nation could hold sway over the gridiron battles of a professional football team? It's a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside a pigskin, and we are eager to decipher its splendid absurdity.
The financial stakes are as high as the excitement of a sudden death overtime, with billions of dollars coursing through the realms of meat consumption and sporting fervor. Yet, amidst this seriousness, we embark on our journey with a twinkle in our eyes and a sprinkle of statistical fairy dust, casting an enchanting light on the serendipitous confluence of meaty indulgence and touchdown triumphs.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To unravel the apparent cosmic dance between annual US household spending on meats, poultry, fish, and eggs and the season wins for the Buffalo Bills, a concoction of data sources and statistical wizardry was brought forth. Like a culinary maestro, we carefully selected the finest ingredients for our analysis, primarily drawing data from the sturdy cauldrons of the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the mystical Pro-Football-Reference.com. These archives provided a rich tapestry of numerical delights for us to weave into our analytical feast, spanning the years from 2000 to 2022.

To begin our quest, we engaged in the arcane art of data cleansing, separating the tender morsels of information on household meat expenditures from the sinewy sinews of football triumphs. Our formidable team of data wranglers toiled under the alluring glow of computer screens, brandishing their digital lassos to corral the information into a recognizable form, much like cowboys herding cattle on the open plains.

With our data untangled and polished, we plunged headfirst into the realm of statistical analysis, employing a captivating array of techniques to unearth any semblance of correlation. The Spearman rank correlation coefficient emerged as our trusty divining rod, leading us through the bewildering jungle of numbers and revealing a robust coefficient of 0.8073380. This discovery was akin to uncovering a hidden city of statistical gold, shedding light on the tantalizing link between protein indulgence and sporting conquests.

Venturing even further into the statistical wilderness, we summoned the formidable p-value of less than 0.01 to our side, lending support to our hypothesis that there exists a meaningful relationship between household meat expenditures and the Bills' prowess on the hallowed gridiron. Yet, as we traversed this statistical terrain, we remained cautious in making grand proclamations of causation, fully aware of the beguiling pitfalls of mere correlation.

As we marveled at our statistical spoils, the inevitable question arose: could it be that the humble act of "beefing up" household meat expenditures might inadvertently infuse the Buffalo Bills with the fortitude needed to seize victory on the field? The mere contemplation of such a notion tickled our scholarly sensibilities, adding a whimsical touch to the usually grave landscape of statistical inquiry.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly researcher writing an academic paper.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 Annual US household spending on meats, poultry, fish, and eggs and Season wins for the Buffalo Bills. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Bureau of Labor Statistics and Pro-Football-Reference.com .

For the time period 2000 to 2022, you found a correlation 0.8073380, r-squared of 0.6517946, 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]]
Meat Expenditure and Marvellous Matches: Mapping the Interplay between Annual US Household Spending on Meats, Poultry, Fish, and Eggs and Season Wins for the Buffalo Bills

[[ABSTRACT]]
The interplay between annual US household spending on meats, poultry, fish, and eggs and the season wins for the Buffalo Bills has long intrigued researchers and football enthusiasts alike. In this study, we utilized data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Pro-Football-Reference.com to unravel the enigmatic correlation between these seemingly disparate variables. Our findings revealed a robust correlation coefficient of 0.8073380 with a p-value of less than 0.01 for the years spanning from 2000 to 2022. While we tread cautiously in inferring causation from correlation, the statistically significant relationship prompts thought-provoking musings on the potential influence of protein preferences on gridiron glory. Our data analysis leaves one pondering whether "beefing up" household meat expenditures might just inadvertently "beef up" the Bills' chance of clinching triumph on the field. This study adds a quirky yet intriguing dimension to the discourse surrounding consumer behavior and sports outcomes, offering a light-hearted take on the serious world of statistical analysis.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
The world of sports and consumer behavior intersects in puzzling and unpredictable ways, offering a bizarre yet irresistible playground for researchers seeking to unravel the enigmatic connections between seemingly unrelated variables. In this study, we set our sights on the curious case of annual US household spending on meats, poultry, fish, and eggs and its peculiar dance with the season wins for the Buffalo Bills. We dive into this peculiar nexus armed with data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Pro-Football-Reference.com, prepared to confront the unknown with statistical rigor and a dash of whimsy.
As we embark on this scholarly escapade, it is imperative to acknowledge the sheer audacity of our quest. Who would have thought that the carnivorous choices of households across the nation could hold sway over the gridiron battles of a professional football team? It's a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside a pigskin, and we are eager to decipher its splendid absurdity.
The financial stakes are as high as the excitement of a sudden death overtime, with billions of dollars coursing through the realms of meat consumption and sporting fervor. Yet, amidst this seriousness, we embark on our journey with a twinkle in our eyes and a sprinkle of statistical fairy dust, casting an enchanting light on the serendipitous confluence of meaty indulgence and touchdown triumphs.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The data analysis yielded a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.8073380 between annual US household spending on meats, poultry, fish, and eggs and the season wins for the Buffalo Bills. The p-value of less than 0.01 further underscores the strength of this relationship, leaving us with statistical evidence that is as solid as Josh Allen's arm. Our r-squared value of 0.6517946 provides additional support for the robustness of the correlation, painting a picture of predictability as clear as a Buffalo winter sky.

Fig. 1 visually encapsulates this fascinating connection, portraying a scatterplot that showcases the compelling alignment of these variables. The notable upward trend in the plot serves as a graphical testament to the uncanny synchronicity between meaty expenditures and the Bills' gridiron conquests. It's as if the aroma of sizzling steaks and the sounds of victorious roars blend harmoniously in the air, creating a symphony of success that transcends the domains of both shopping carts and pigskins.

While we exercise caution in attributing causality to correlation, the strength of our findings reignites the age-old debate concerning the power of protein on athletic prowess. Could it be that the key to unlocking the Bills' potential lies not only in their playbook but also in the protein choices of American households? It's a tantalizing hypothesis that adds a sprinkle of flavor to the meat-and-potatoes world of statistical analysis, prompting us to contemplate whether a carnivorous surge in spending could serve as a secret sauce for the Bills' recipe for victory.

In summary, our study offers a whimsical yet thought-provoking angle to the perplexing dynamics between consumer behavior and sports performance. The peculiar bond between household meat expenditures and gridiron triumphs emerges as a delightful curveball in the realm of statistical analysis, inviting us to chuckle at the unexpected ways in which the whims of consumer wallets can ripple through the achievements of a football team. We invite readers to savor the quirkiness of our findings, sprinkled with statistical seasoning and a pinch of playful pondering.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly researcher writing an academic paper.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 Annual US household spending on meats, poultry, fish, and eggs and Season wins for the Buffalo Bills. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, 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]]
Meat Expenditure and Marvellous Matches: Mapping the Interplay between Annual US Household Spending on Meats, Poultry, Fish, and Eggs and Season Wins for the Buffalo Bills

[[ABSTRACT]]
The interplay between annual US household spending on meats, poultry, fish, and eggs and the season wins for the Buffalo Bills has long intrigued researchers and football enthusiasts alike. In this study, we utilized data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Pro-Football-Reference.com to unravel the enigmatic correlation between these seemingly disparate variables. Our findings revealed a robust correlation coefficient of 0.8073380 with a p-value of less than 0.01 for the years spanning from 2000 to 2022. While we tread cautiously in inferring causation from correlation, the statistically significant relationship prompts thought-provoking musings on the potential influence of protein preferences on gridiron glory. Our data analysis leaves one pondering whether "beefing up" household meat expenditures might just inadvertently "beef up" the Bills' chance of clinching triumph on the field. This study adds a quirky yet intriguing dimension to the discourse surrounding consumer behavior and sports outcomes, offering a light-hearted take on the serious world of statistical analysis.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The study of the perplexing correlation between annual US household spending on meats, poultry, fish, and eggs, and the seasonal victories of the Buffalo Bills has attracted widespread attention from researchers, economists, and football aficionados alike. Smith et al. (2015) found a statistically significant positive association between red meat consumption and increased sports team performance, laying the groundwork for our current investigation. In "Doe," the authors explore the societal impact of meat consumption, shedding light on the potential influence of dietary choices on broader cultural phenomena.
Turning to the realm of literary inquiry, "Eating Animals" by Jonathan Safran Foer and "The Omnivore's Dilemma" by Michael Pollan offer profound insights into the intricate relationship between human dietary habits and their broader implications. Deep in the fictional canon, "The Catcher in the Rye" by J.D. Salinger and "To Kill a Mockingbird" by Harper Lee, though not overtly related to our study, remind us of the unpredictable connections that may exist between seemingly disparate elements.
Drawing further inspiration from popular culture, "Man vs. Food" and "Diners, Drive-Ins, and Dives" serve as lighthearted yet surprisingly informative sources, offering a feast of gastronomic explorations that may inform our understanding of household spending habits and, by extension, football triumphs. These unconventional yet intriguing references pique our interest in uncovering the whimsical undercurrents beneath the seemingly serious façade of statistical analysis.
As we wade deeper into this intertwining tapestry of consumer behavior and athletic prowess, we cannot discount the possibility of serendipitous interactions and hidden variables that lie beneath the surface, waiting to be unearthed with a whimsical wave of the data wand.

[[RESULTS]]
The data analysis yielded a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.8073380 between annual US household spending on meats, poultry, fish, and eggs and the season wins for the Buffalo Bills. The p-value of less than 0.01 further underscores the strength of this relationship, leaving us with statistical evidence that is as solid as Josh Allen's arm. Our r-squared value of 0.6517946 provides additional support for the robustness of the correlation, painting a picture of predictability as clear as a Buffalo winter sky.
Fig. 1 visually encapsulates this fascinating connection, portraying a scatterplot that showcases the compelling alignment of these variables. The notable upward trend in the plot serves as a graphical testament to the uncanny synchronicity between meaty expenditures and the Bills' gridiron conquests. It's as if the aroma of sizzling steaks and the sounds of victorious roars blend harmoniously in the air, creating a symphony of success that transcends the domains of both shopping carts and pigskins.
While we exercise caution in attributing causality to correlation, the strength of our findings reignites the age-old debate concerning the power of protein on athletic prowess. Could it be that the key to unlocking the Bills' potential lies not only in their playbook but also in the protein choices of American households? It's a tantalizing hypothesis that adds a sprinkle of flavor to the meat-and-potatoes world of statistical analysis, prompting us to contemplate whether a carnivorous surge in spending could serve as a secret sauce for the Bills' recipe for victory.
In summary, our study offers a whimsical yet thought-provoking angle to the perplexing dynamics between consumer behavior and sports performance. The peculiar bond between household meat expenditures and gridiron triumphs emerges as a delightful curveball in the realm of statistical analysis, inviting us to chuckle at the unexpected ways in which the whims of consumer wallets can ripple through the achievements of a football team. We invite readers to savor the quirkiness of our findings, sprinkled with statistical seasoning and a pinch of playful pondering.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The findings of our study have brought forth a mélange of statistical revelations and flavorful hypothetical musings. Our results not only corroborate previous research that delved into the enigmatic connection between red meat consumption and athletic prowess but also provide a whimsical twist to the otherwise stern world of statistical analysis.

It is worth noting that the robust correlation coefficient we unearthed aligns with the findings of Smith et al. (2015), who highlighted a positive association between red meat consumption and sports team performance. Our study, in a light-hearted yet scholarly manner, extends these findings to encompass a broader spectrum of meaty delights, integrating poultry, fish, and eggs into the mix. The statistically significant relationship that we observed reverberates like a touchdown cheer, allowing us to humorously ponder whether a surge in meaty expenditures indeed "beefs up" the Bills' chance of clinching triumph on the field.

Our foray into the literature review carried us through unexpected detours into tangentially related works such as "The Catcher in the Rye" and "Diners, Drive-Ins, and Dives." While the whimsical references may have elicited a chuckle, they--along with more academically grounded research--underscore the unpredictable yet fascinating interplay between seemingly unrelated domains. Thus, as we delve into the role of protein preferences on gridiron glory, it becomes apparent that the potent influence of dietary habits extends beyond the scope of individual health and nudges its way into the unlikeliest arenas of sports fervor.

The robustness of our correlation, encapsulated by the r-squared value, echoes a predictability as clear as a Buffalo winter sky. Our scatterplot, a visual feast for the eyes, vividly portrays the enticing alignment of meaty expenditures and the Bills' gridiron conquests, hinting at a delightful symphony of success that transcends shopping carts and pigskins alike.

In conclusion, our study offers a lighthearted yet intriguing perspective to the perplexing dynamics between consumer behavior and sports performance. The correlation between household meat expenditures and gridiron triumphs emerges as a delightful curveball in the realm of statistical analysis, inviting us to chuckle at the unexpected ways in which the whims of consumer wallets can ripple through the achievements of a football team. It prompts us to savor the quirkiness of our findings, sprinkled with statistical seasoning and a pinch of playful pondering.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly researcher writing an academic paper.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 Annual US household spending on meats, poultry, fish, and eggs and Season wins for the Buffalo Bills. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, 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]]
Meat Expenditure and Marvellous Matches: Mapping the Interplay between Annual US Household Spending on Meats, Poultry, Fish, and Eggs and Season Wins for the Buffalo Bills

[[ABSTRACT]]
The interplay between annual US household spending on meats, poultry, fish, and eggs and the season wins for the Buffalo Bills has long intrigued researchers and football enthusiasts alike. In this study, we utilized data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Pro-Football-Reference.com to unravel the enigmatic correlation between these seemingly disparate variables. Our findings revealed a robust correlation coefficient of 0.8073380 with a p-value of less than 0.01 for the years spanning from 2000 to 2022. While we tread cautiously in inferring causation from correlation, the statistically significant relationship prompts thought-provoking musings on the potential influence of protein preferences on gridiron glory. Our data analysis leaves one pondering whether "beefing up" household meat expenditures might just inadvertently "beef up" the Bills' chance of clinching triumph on the field. This study adds a quirky yet intriguing dimension to the discourse surrounding consumer behavior and sports outcomes, offering a light-hearted take on the serious world of statistical analysis.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
The world of sports and consumer behavior intersects in puzzling and unpredictable ways, offering a bizarre yet irresistible playground for researchers seeking to unravel the enigmatic connections between seemingly unrelated variables. In this study, we set our sights on the curious case of annual US household spending on meats, poultry, fish, and eggs and its peculiar dance with the season wins for the Buffalo Bills. We dive into this peculiar nexus armed with data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Pro-Football-Reference.com, prepared to confront the unknown with statistical rigor and a dash of whimsy.
As we embark on this scholarly escapade, it is imperative to acknowledge the sheer audacity of our quest. Who would have thought that the carnivorous choices of households across the nation could hold sway over the gridiron battles of a professional football team? It's a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside a pigskin, and we are eager to decipher its splendid absurdity.
The financial stakes are as high as the excitement of a sudden death overtime, with billions of dollars coursing through the realms of meat consumption and sporting fervor. Yet, amidst this seriousness, we embark on our journey with a twinkle in our eyes and a sprinkle of statistical fairy dust, casting an enchanting light on the serendipitous confluence of meaty indulgence and touchdown triumphs.

[[RESULTS]]
The data analysis yielded a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.8073380 between annual US household spending on meats, poultry, fish, and eggs and the season wins for the Buffalo Bills. The p-value of less than 0.01 further underscores the strength of this relationship, leaving us with statistical evidence that is as solid as Josh Allen's arm. Our r-squared value of 0.6517946 provides additional support for the robustness of the correlation, painting a picture of predictability as clear as a Buffalo winter sky.
Fig. 1 visually encapsulates this fascinating connection, portraying a scatterplot that showcases the compelling alignment of these variables. The notable upward trend in the plot serves as a graphical testament to the uncanny synchronicity between meaty expenditures and the Bills' gridiron conquests. It's as if the aroma of sizzling steaks and the sounds of victorious roars blend harmoniously in the air, creating a symphony of success that transcends the domains of both shopping carts and pigskins.
While we exercise caution in attributing causality to correlation, the strength of our findings reignites the age-old debate concerning the power of protein on athletic prowess. Could it be that the key to unlocking the Bills' potential lies not only in their playbook but also in the protein choices of American households? It's a tantalizing hypothesis that adds a sprinkle of flavor to the meat-and-potatoes world of statistical analysis, prompting us to contemplate whether a carnivorous surge in spending could serve as a secret sauce for the Bills' recipe for victory.
In summary, our study offers a whimsical yet thought-provoking angle to the perplexing dynamics between consumer behavior and sports performance. The peculiar bond between household meat expenditures and gridiron triumphs emerges as a delightful curveball in the realm of statistical analysis, inviting us to chuckle at the unexpected ways in which the whims of consumer wallets can ripple through the achievements of a football team. We invite readers to savor the quirkiness of our findings, sprinkled with statistical seasoning and a pinch of playful pondering.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our study illuminates the curious connection between annual US household spending on meats, poultry, fish, and eggs and the season wins for the Buffalo Bills. The robust correlation coefficient and p-value emphasize a statistically significant relationship that raises eyebrows as much as touchdown celebrations. Our findings add a whimsical touch to the often serious realm of statistical analysis, inviting readers to ponder whether the path to gridiron success is paved with protein-packed purchases. As we bid adieu to this strange yet fascinating journey through the world of consumer meat preferences and football victories, we can't help but marvel at the delightful absurdity of it all. It seems that the age-old question of "chicken or egg" has found a new context in the realm of American football and grocery aisles. Our study encourages a lighthearted reflection on the unexpected ways in which our meaty expenditures might secretly influence the triumphs and tribulations of the Buffalo Bills on the field. With a hearty chuckle and a dash of statistical seasoning, we dare say, "case closed!" It appears that no further research in this area is needed; let's leave this particular pigskin puzzle to rest, marinated in its own quirky charm.


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 Meat Expenditure and Marvellous Matches: Mapping the Interplay between Annual US Household Spending on Meats, Poultry, Fish, and Eggs and Season Wins for the Buffalo Bills. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Culinary Economics and Sports 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 Meat Expenditure and Marvellous Matches: Mapping the Interplay between Annual US Household Spending on Meats, Poultry, Fish, and Eggs and Season Wins for the Buffalo Bills. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

Society for the Advancement of Culinary and Sports Analytics


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 Meat Expenditure and Marvellous Matches: Mapping the Interplay between Annual US Household Spending on Meats, Poultry, Fish, and Eggs and Season Wins for the Buffalo Bills with an abstract of The interplay between annual US household spending on meats, poultry, fish, and eggs and the season wins for the Buffalo Bills has long intrigued researchers and football enthusiasts alike. In this study, we utilized data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Pro-Football-Reference.com to unravel the enigmatic correlation between these seemingly disparate variables. Our findings revealed a robust correlation coefficient of 0.8073380 with a p-value of less than 0.01 for the years spanning from 2000 to 2022. While we tread cautiously in inferring causation from correlation, the statistically significant relationship prompts thought-provoking musings on the potential influence of protein preferences on gridiron glory. Our data analysis leaves one pondering whether "beefing up" household meat expenditures might just inadvertently "beef up" the Bills' chance of clinching triumph on the field. This study adds a quirky yet intriguing dimension to the discourse surrounding consumer behavior and sports outcomes, offering a light-hearted take on the serious world of statistical analysis.

ChatGPT:

meat expenditure, household spending on meats, poultry, fish, eggs, Buffalo Bills NFL season wins, US Bureau of Labor Statistics, Pro-Football-Reference.com, correlation between consumer behavior and sports outcomes

*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

Annual US household spending on meats, poultry, fish, and eggs
Detailed data title: Average annual household spend on meats, poultry, fish, and eggs
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics
See what else correlates with Annual US household spending on meats, poultry, fish, and eggs

Season wins for the Buffalo Bills
Detailed data title: Number of season wins by the Buffalo Bills
Source: Pro-Football-Reference.com
See what else correlates with Season wins for the Buffalo Bills

Correlation r = 0.8073380 (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 = 0.6517946 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 65.2% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Season wins for the Buffalo Bills) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Annual US household spending on meats, poultry, fish, and eggs) over the 23 years from 2000 through 2022.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 3.2E-6. 0.0000032231227021088450000000
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 0.81 in 0.00032% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 310,258 random variables You don't actually need 310 thousand variables to find a correlation like this one. I don't have that many variables in my database. You can also correlate variables that are not independent. I do this a lot.

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

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

Just to be clear: I'm being completely transparent about the calculations. There is no math trickery. This is just how statistics shakes out when you calculate hundreds of millions of random correlations.
with the same 22 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 22 because we have two variables measured over a period of 23 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.

[ 0.59, 0.92 ] 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.
20002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022
Annual US household spending on meats, poultry, fish, and eggs (Household spend)795828798825880764797777846841784832852856892896890944961980107511151216
Season wins for the Buffalo Bills (Bills wins)838695777646669879610131113




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. 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([795,828,798,825,880,764,797,777,846,841,784,832,852,856,892,896,890,944,961,980,1075,1115,1216,])
array_2 = np.array([8,3,8,6,9,5,7,7,7,6,4,6,6,6,9,8,7,9,6,10,13,11,13,])
array_1_name = "Annual US household spending on meats, poultry, fish, and eggs"
array_2_name = "Season wins for the Buffalo Bills"

# 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?

Cheers to you for rating this correlation!


Correlation ID: 1997 · Black Variable ID: 19888 · Red Variable ID: 19651
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0