about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #2,076 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Air pollution in Memphis and the second variable is Gasoline pumped in Norway.  The chart goes from 1980 to 2022, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As the air quality in Memphis improved, it created a ripple effect on a global scale. This led to a highly unexpected phenomenon known as atmospheric translocation, wherein the cleaner air in Memphis somehow interacted with distant regions. The particles from the decreased air pollution in Memphis formed a temporary green corridor in the atmosphere, which coincided with the trajectory of gasoline being pumped in Norway. This unexpected alignment resulted in a mild but measurable decrease in the amount of gasoline being pumped, much to the bewilderment of experts. While this may seem like a peculiar occurrence, it underscores the interconnectedness of environmental factors on a truly global level, prompting a reevaluation of traditional models of air and gas dynamics. It's a testament to the far-reaching impact of local environmental efforts and a reminder that when it comes to our planet, the air we share knows no boundaries.

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Style: Whimsical illustration Scene: In Memphis, the air is filled with a hazy, smoggy quality, making it difficult to see clearly. Filling the air are traces of gasoline fumes, making it evident that cars and vehicles are contributing to the poor air quality. Image Generation Prompt: Generate an image of a charming, vintage car chugging along a smog-filled road in Memphis. The car should have exaggerated features, such as large, expressive headlights and a whimsical, anthropomorphic design. The smog should be depicted as colorful swirls, giving the scene a dreamy, fantastical atmosphere. The overall visual should capture the surreal essence of this polluted yet enchanting environment. 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: Unhealthy air quality in Memphis and Gasoline pumped in Norway. 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: Whimsical illustration Voxel art Scalar art Oragami Cutsy graphics
ChatGPT: Whimsical illustration

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 Unhealthy air quality in Memphis and Gasoline pumped in Norway together. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In Memphis, the air is filled with a hazy, smoggy quality, making it difficult to see clearly. Filling the air are traces of gasoline fumes, making it evident that cars and vehicles are contributing to the poor air quality.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You write and improve image generation prompts for DALLE-3. You maintain the same subjects, but enhance the visuals.
User prompt: Please respond with an image generation prompt that would be likely to create an interesting visual using DALLE-3, using the following style: [ Whimsical illustration ] and depicting this scene: In Memphis, the air is filled with a hazy, smoggy quality, making it difficult to see clearly. Filling the air are traces of gasoline fumes, making it evident that cars and vehicles are contributing to the poor air quality. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Style: Whimsical illustration Scene: In Memphis, the air is filled with a hazy, smoggy quality, making it difficult to see clearly. Filling the air are traces of gasoline fumes, making it evident that cars and vehicles are contributing to the poor air quality. Image Generation Prompt: Generate an image of a charming, vintage car chugging along a smog-filled road in Memphis. The car should have exaggerated features, such as large, expressive headlights and a whimsical, anthropomorphic design. The smog should be depicted as colorful swirls, giving the scene a dreamy, fantastical atmosphere. The overall visual should capture the surreal essence of this polluted yet enchanting environment.

*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 a decrease in Air pollution in Memphis caused Gasoline pumped in Norway to decrease.\Make it sound serious until the end.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
A Breath of Fresh Air or a Tank Full of Trouble: Exploring the Surprising Link Between Unhealthy Air Quality in Memphis and Gasoline Pumped in Norway

The Journal of Global Environmental Connections

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 Unhealthy air quality in Memphis and Gasoline pumped in Norway. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Make the title seem clever.

Your research team used data from Environmental Protection Agency and Energy Information Administration to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.8300232 and p < 0.01 for 1980 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]]
"A Breath of Fresh Air or a Tank Full of Trouble: Exploring the Surprising Link Between Unhealthy Air Quality in Memphis and Gasoline Pumped in Norway"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research paper presents the findings of a comprehensive investigation into the intriguing link between unhealthy air quality in Memphis, Tennessee, and the gasoline consumption in Norway. Utilizing data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Information Administration, our research team conducted a thorough assessment of this unexpected connection. The analysis revealed a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.8300232 and p < 0.01 for the time period spanning from 1980 to 2022, shedding light on the unsuspected relationship between these seemingly disparate environmental factors. The implications of these findings extend beyond mere coincidence, presenting a novel and unanticipated perspective on the dynamics influencing air quality in Memphis and gasoline consumption in Norway. This study not only underscores the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration but also highlights the interconnectedness of global environmental factors.


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 Unhealthy air quality in Memphis and Gasoline pumped in Norway. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"A Breath of Fresh Air or a Tank Full of Trouble: Exploring the Surprising Link Between Unhealthy Air Quality in Memphis and Gasoline Pumped in Norway"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research paper presents the findings of a comprehensive investigation into the intriguing link between unhealthy air quality in Memphis, Tennessee, and the gasoline consumption in Norway. Utilizing data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Information Administration, our research team conducted a thorough assessment of this unexpected connection. The analysis revealed a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.8300232 and p < 0.01 for the time period spanning from 1980 to 2022, shedding light on the unsuspected relationship between these seemingly disparate environmental factors. The implications of these findings extend beyond mere coincidence, presenting a novel and unanticipated perspective on the dynamics influencing air quality in Memphis and gasoline consumption in Norway. This study not only underscores the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration but also highlights the interconnectedness of global environmental factors.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
INTRODUCTION

The discussion surrounding air quality and its impact on public health has long been a topic of global concern. In recent years, the burgeoning call for environmental sustainability and the mitigation of pollutants has led to a renaissance in the research realm, delving into the intricacies of air quality dynamics. Similarly, the global landscape of energy consumption and the associated environmental ramifications have spurred extensive investigations into the sources and effects of various fuel types. However, the peculiar interplay between the air quality in Memphis and the gasoline usage in Norway has remained a conundrum, eluding conventional understanding and warranting a thorough exploration.

While one might not instinctively associate the distinctive aromas permeating Memphis with the verdant landscapes of Norway, our research endeavors unveiled a striking correlation between the two. The seemingly disparate realms of air quality and gasoline consumption converged in an unexpected manner, much like finding a pair of mismatched socks in a drawer. The journey to unravel this baffling correspondence involved traversing diverse datasets and employing rigorous statistical analyses, akin to embarking on a scavenger hunt across the labyrinth of academic resources. Our efforts were not in vain, as the resulting findings unearthed an unequivocal link between these seemingly incongruous environmental facets.

The expository elucidation of this unanticipated relationship does not merely serve to pique the curiosity of academia and the public alike; it also underscores the interconnected nature of global environmental dynamics, much like discovering a hidden harmonious melody in the cacophony of discordant notes. This paper aims to elucidate the robustness of the correlation observed, shedding light on the tangled web of causation and influence that intertwines air quality in Memphis and gasoline consumption in Norway. Moreover, the implications of this study transcend the boundaries of mere academic inquiry, extending to policy interventions and public awareness initiatives, much like a ripple effect emanating from a pebble dropped in a serene pond.

In the subsequent sections, we will embark on a journey through the labyrinth of data, traversing the nuanced landscape of air quality assessment and gasoline utilization. Buckle up and prepare to navigate the twists and turns of this enigmatic nexus, much like embarking on an unexpectedly eventful road trip through uncharted territories. Our quest is not merely to illuminate this perplexing correlation but also to evoke a refreshed perspective on the intricate tapestry of environmental interconnections. A breath of fresh air or a tank full of trouble – let us unravel the mystery that binds Memphis and Norway in this unlikely environmental alliance.


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 Unhealthy air quality in Memphis and Gasoline pumped in Norway. 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]]
"A Breath of Fresh Air or a Tank Full of Trouble: Exploring the Surprising Link Between Unhealthy Air Quality in Memphis and Gasoline Pumped in Norway"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research paper presents the findings of a comprehensive investigation into the intriguing link between unhealthy air quality in Memphis, Tennessee, and the gasoline consumption in Norway. Utilizing data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Information Administration, our research team conducted a thorough assessment of this unexpected connection. The analysis revealed a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.8300232 and p < 0.01 for the time period spanning from 1980 to 2022, shedding light on the unsuspected relationship between these seemingly disparate environmental factors. The implications of these findings extend beyond mere coincidence, presenting a novel and unanticipated perspective on the dynamics influencing air quality in Memphis and gasoline consumption in Norway. This study not only underscores the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration but also highlights the interconnectedness of global environmental factors.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
INTRODUCTION
The discussion surrounding air quality and its impact on public health has long been a topic of global concern. In recent years, the burgeoning call for environmental sustainability and the mitigation of pollutants has led to a renaissance in the research realm, delving into the intricacies of air quality dynamics. Similarly, the global landscape of energy consumption and the associated environmental ramifications have spurred extensive investigations into the sources and effects of various fuel types. However, the peculiar interplay between the air quality in Memphis and the gasoline usage in Norway has remained a conundrum, eluding conventional understanding and warranting a thorough exploration.
While one might not instinctively associate the distinctive aromas permeating Memphis with the verdant landscapes of Norway, our research endeavors unveiled a striking correlation between the two. The seemingly disparate realms of air quality and gasoline consumption converged in an unexpected manner, much like finding a pair of mismatched socks in a drawer. The journey to unravel this baffling correspondence involved traversing diverse datasets and employing rigorous statistical analyses, akin to embarking on a scavenger hunt across the labyrinth of academic resources. Our efforts were not in vain, as the resulting findings unearthed an unequivocal link between these seemingly incongruous environmental facets.
The expository elucidation of this unanticipated relationship does not merely serve to pique the curiosity of academia and the public alike; it also underscores the interconnected nature of global environmental dynamics, much like discovering a hidden harmonious melody in the cacophony of discordant notes. This paper aims to elucidate the robustness of the correlation observed, shedding light on the tangled web of causation and influence that intertwines air quality in Memphis and gasoline consumption in Norway. Moreover, the implications of this study transcend the boundaries of mere academic inquiry, extending to policy interventions and public awareness initiatives, much like a ripple effect emanating from a pebble dropped in a serene pond.
In the subsequent sections, we will embark on a journey through the labyrinth of data, traversing the nuanced landscape of air quality assessment and gasoline utilization. Buckle up and prepare to navigate the twists and turns of this enigmatic nexus, much like embarking on an unexpectedly eventful road trip through uncharted territories. Our quest is not merely to illuminate this perplexing correlation but also to evoke a refreshed perspective on the intricate tapestry of environmental interconnections. A breath of fresh air or a tank full of trouble – let us unravel the mystery that binds Memphis and Norway in this unlikely environmental alliance.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The surprisingly strong correlation between unhealthy air quality in Memphis and the gasoline consumption in Norway has prompted a comprehensive review of existing literature and research studies. Smith and Doe (2010) conducted an extensive analysis of air quality in urban environments, shedding light on the factors contributing to elevated levels of pollutants. Their findings highlighted the complex interplay of industrial emissions, vehicular traffic, and atmospheric conditions, providing a solid foundation for understanding the challenges posed by air pollution in metropolitan areas. However, their study did not anticipate the unlikely connection with gasoline consumption in a distant Scandinavian country, adding an unexpected twist to their originally intended research focus.

Jones (2015) ventured into the realm of global energy consumption patterns, providing a detailed account of the diverse sources of fuel utilized around the world. The intricate web of geopolitical influences and resource availability elucidated by Jones (2015) deepened our understanding of the complex dynamics shaping energy consumption trends. Little did Jones know that his exploration of fuel usage would ultimately intersect with the seemingly unrelated issue of air quality in Memphis, creating a serendipitous fusion of environmental disciplines worthy of a plot twist in a suspenseful novel.

The works of non-fiction authors such as "The Air Pollution Dilemma" by G. Thomas and "Fueling the Future" by R. Johnson offer valuable insights into the challenges and opportunities presented by environmental pollution and energy consumption. However, one cannot help but wonder if the authors ever suspected that their scholarly pursuits would inadvertently converge in a comical collision of unrelated topics, akin to a fortuitous mishap in a sitcom plotline.

Turning to the realm of fiction, novels such as "The Air Affair" by J. Novel and "Fuel Frenzy" by S. Story blend environmental themes with imaginative storytelling. While these literary works may provide an escape from the rigors of academic research, they unwittingly mirror the uncanny connection between air quality in Memphis and gasoline consumption in Norway, almost as if the fictional narratives have leaped from the pages and manifested in the real world.

In a light-hearted exploration of popular culture, TV shows such as "Airbenders" and "Nordic Fuel Mysteries" offer entertainment value while inadvertently drawing attention to the unexpected intersection of air quality and gasoline usage. The creators of these shows likely never anticipated that their fictional narratives would bear a striking resemblance to the actual correlation observed in our research, blurring the line between scripted drama and empirical reality.

The convergence of unrelated disciplines in this peculiar association between Memphis' air quality and Norway's gasoline consumption has injected an element of whimsy into the otherwise serious realm of environmental research. As we delve deeper into the tangled web of interconnected environmental factors, it becomes increasingly evident that truth is indeed stranger than fiction, and the nexus between these disparate elements yields an unexpected comedic twist in the tapestry of academic inquiry.


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 Unhealthy air quality in Memphis and Gasoline pumped in Norway. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Environmental Protection Agency and Energy Information Administration . You used data from 1980 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]]
"A Breath of Fresh Air or a Tank Full of Trouble: Exploring the Surprising Link Between Unhealthy Air Quality in Memphis and Gasoline Pumped in Norway"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research paper presents the findings of a comprehensive investigation into the intriguing link between unhealthy air quality in Memphis, Tennessee, and the gasoline consumption in Norway. Utilizing data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Information Administration, our research team conducted a thorough assessment of this unexpected connection. The analysis revealed a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.8300232 and p < 0.01 for the time period spanning from 1980 to 2022, shedding light on the unsuspected relationship between these seemingly disparate environmental factors. The implications of these findings extend beyond mere coincidence, presenting a novel and unanticipated perspective on the dynamics influencing air quality in Memphis and gasoline consumption in Norway. This study not only underscores the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration but also highlights the interconnectedness of global environmental factors.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
INTRODUCTION
The discussion surrounding air quality and its impact on public health has long been a topic of global concern. In recent years, the burgeoning call for environmental sustainability and the mitigation of pollutants has led to a renaissance in the research realm, delving into the intricacies of air quality dynamics. Similarly, the global landscape of energy consumption and the associated environmental ramifications have spurred extensive investigations into the sources and effects of various fuel types. However, the peculiar interplay between the air quality in Memphis and the gasoline usage in Norway has remained a conundrum, eluding conventional understanding and warranting a thorough exploration.
While one might not instinctively associate the distinctive aromas permeating Memphis with the verdant landscapes of Norway, our research endeavors unveiled a striking correlation between the two. The seemingly disparate realms of air quality and gasoline consumption converged in an unexpected manner, much like finding a pair of mismatched socks in a drawer. The journey to unravel this baffling correspondence involved traversing diverse datasets and employing rigorous statistical analyses, akin to embarking on a scavenger hunt across the labyrinth of academic resources. Our efforts were not in vain, as the resulting findings unearthed an unequivocal link between these seemingly incongruous environmental facets.
The expository elucidation of this unanticipated relationship does not merely serve to pique the curiosity of academia and the public alike; it also underscores the interconnected nature of global environmental dynamics, much like discovering a hidden harmonious melody in the cacophony of discordant notes. This paper aims to elucidate the robustness of the correlation observed, shedding light on the tangled web of causation and influence that intertwines air quality in Memphis and gasoline consumption in Norway. Moreover, the implications of this study transcend the boundaries of mere academic inquiry, extending to policy interventions and public awareness initiatives, much like a ripple effect emanating from a pebble dropped in a serene pond.
In the subsequent sections, we will embark on a journey through the labyrinth of data, traversing the nuanced landscape of air quality assessment and gasoline utilization. Buckle up and prepare to navigate the twists and turns of this enigmatic nexus, much like embarking on an unexpectedly eventful road trip through uncharted territories. Our quest is not merely to illuminate this perplexing correlation but also to evoke a refreshed perspective on the intricate tapestry of environmental interconnections. A breath of fresh air or a tank full of trouble – let us unravel the mystery that binds Memphis and Norway in this unlikely environmental alliance.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To unravel the perplexing connection between unhealthy air quality in Memphis and gasoline consumption in Norway, our research team employed a comprehensive and multifaceted approach, akin to untangling a particularly intricate knot. We gathered data from a variety of reputable sources, diligently sifting through the digital archives of the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Information Administration. The time frame for our analysis spanned from 1980 to 2022, allowing us to capture the evolutionary nuances of this unlikely relationship and avoid any abrupt gas stops on the road to discovery.

The first step in our methodological odyssey involved the collection of air quality indices for Memphis and the gasoline consumption metrics for Norway. While the seamless navigation of disparate databases and spreadsheets may not rival the excitement of scaling a mountain, our team painstakingly assembled these datasets, ensuring that our foundations were as sturdy as a well-fortified castle.

With our datasets securely in hand, we embarked on the arduous task of data cleaning and preparation, akin to meticulously packing a suitcase for an adventurous journey. This involved filtering out any outliers or irregularities, akin to smoothing out the wrinkles in a map before embarking on an expedition.

Next, armed with statistical software akin to a trusty compass, we performed a series of analyses to discern the degree of association between air quality in Memphis and gasoline consumption in Norway. We calculated correlation coefficients and conducted regression analyses, akin to calibrating the navigational instruments before embarking on a nautical voyage.

Additionally, we employed advanced time series analysis techniques to examine the temporal patterns and trends, as unraveling the chronology of this unusual correlation demanded a keen sense of temporal acuity, much like tracing the evolution of a quirky fashion trend over the decades.

The resulting analyses served as our trusty guides through the labyrinth of data, illuminating the unexpected correlation coefficient of 0.8300232 and p < 0.01, which stood as a testament to the robustness of the observed relationship.

Moreover, to fortify the rigor of our findings, we implemented sensitivity analyses and cross-validation procedures, akin to double-checking the itinerary and ensuring that we were on the right track to our destination of elucidating this paradoxical alliance.

Having navigated the complexities of data procurement, preparation, and analysis, we emerged with a comprehensive understanding of the enigmatic nexus between unhealthy air quality in Memphis and gasoline consumption in Norway. Our methodological travels may not have involved traversing physical landscapes, but they were nonetheless marked by a sense of adventure and discovery, much like navigating uncharted territories in the pursuit of knowledge.

In the subsequent sections, we will unveil the captivating findings of this peculiar exploration, offering a window into the unexpected connections that underpin the global environmental tapestry. Onward we march, on the road to decoding the perplexing partnership between Memphis and Norway in this curious environmental confluence.


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 Unhealthy air quality in Memphis and Gasoline pumped in Norway. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

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

For the time period 1980 to 2022, you found a correlation 0.8300232, r-squared of 0.6889386, 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]]
"A Breath of Fresh Air or a Tank Full of Trouble: Exploring the Surprising Link Between Unhealthy Air Quality in Memphis and Gasoline Pumped in Norway"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research paper presents the findings of a comprehensive investigation into the intriguing link between unhealthy air quality in Memphis, Tennessee, and the gasoline consumption in Norway. Utilizing data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Information Administration, our research team conducted a thorough assessment of this unexpected connection. The analysis revealed a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.8300232 and p < 0.01 for the time period spanning from 1980 to 2022, shedding light on the unsuspected relationship between these seemingly disparate environmental factors. The implications of these findings extend beyond mere coincidence, presenting a novel and unanticipated perspective on the dynamics influencing air quality in Memphis and gasoline consumption in Norway. This study not only underscores the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration but also highlights the interconnectedness of global environmental factors.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
INTRODUCTION
The discussion surrounding air quality and its impact on public health has long been a topic of global concern. In recent years, the burgeoning call for environmental sustainability and the mitigation of pollutants has led to a renaissance in the research realm, delving into the intricacies of air quality dynamics. Similarly, the global landscape of energy consumption and the associated environmental ramifications have spurred extensive investigations into the sources and effects of various fuel types. However, the peculiar interplay between the air quality in Memphis and the gasoline usage in Norway has remained a conundrum, eluding conventional understanding and warranting a thorough exploration.
While one might not instinctively associate the distinctive aromas permeating Memphis with the verdant landscapes of Norway, our research endeavors unveiled a striking correlation between the two. The seemingly disparate realms of air quality and gasoline consumption converged in an unexpected manner, much like finding a pair of mismatched socks in a drawer. The journey to unravel this baffling correspondence involved traversing diverse datasets and employing rigorous statistical analyses, akin to embarking on a scavenger hunt across the labyrinth of academic resources. Our efforts were not in vain, as the resulting findings unearthed an unequivocal link between these seemingly incongruous environmental facets.
The expository elucidation of this unanticipated relationship does not merely serve to pique the curiosity of academia and the public alike; it also underscores the interconnected nature of global environmental dynamics, much like discovering a hidden harmonious melody in the cacophony of discordant notes. This paper aims to elucidate the robustness of the correlation observed, shedding light on the tangled web of causation and influence that intertwines air quality in Memphis and gasoline consumption in Norway. Moreover, the implications of this study transcend the boundaries of mere academic inquiry, extending to policy interventions and public awareness initiatives, much like a ripple effect emanating from a pebble dropped in a serene pond.
In the subsequent sections, we will embark on a journey through the labyrinth of data, traversing the nuanced landscape of air quality assessment and gasoline utilization. Buckle up and prepare to navigate the twists and turns of this enigmatic nexus, much like embarking on an unexpectedly eventful road trip through uncharted territories. Our quest is not merely to illuminate this perplexing correlation but also to evoke a refreshed perspective on the intricate tapestry of environmental interconnections. A breath of fresh air or a tank full of trouble – let us unravel the mystery that binds Memphis and Norway in this unlikely environmental alliance.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

Our analysis revealed a striking correlation between unhealthy air quality in Memphis and gasoline consumption in Norway, with a correlation coefficient of 0.8300232, an r-squared of 0.6889386, and a p-value less than 0.01 for the time period of 1980 to 2022. The scatterplot (Fig. 1) provides a visual representation of this robust correlation, resembling a snapshot of two unlikely acquaintances caught in a meaningful conversation.

The strength of this connection surpassed our initial expectations, akin to stumbling upon a hidden treasure trove of statistical significance in a vast sea of data. The surprising coherence between the air quality woes of Memphis and the gasoline indulgence of Norway not only challenges conventional notions but also presents a compelling case for further investigation into these seemingly incongruent environmental domains. It is as if the aroma of BBQ from Memphis and the fjord landscapes of Norway have engaged in an unprecedented dance, with gasoline consumption as the unexpected melody.

Our findings hold implications that extend beyond the realms of empirical observation, transcending into the domains of environmental policy and public awareness campaigns. This discovery serves as a reminder of the intertwined nature of global environmental factors, much like unearthing a hidden underground network of interconnected tunnels beneath the surface of conventional wisdom. It underscores the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration and the potential insights that arise from seeking connections in unexpected places, much like finding unexpected humor in a dry academic paper.

This revelation prompts a reevaluation of the intricate web of environmental interplay, urging us to embark on a journey of exploration and discovery, not unlike uncovering a long-lost recipe for an unlikely yet delectable dish. The results of this study emphasize the need for continued interdisciplinary research efforts and offer a fresh perspective on the complex dynamics that underpin environmental quality across geographical boundaries.


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 Unhealthy air quality in Memphis and Gasoline pumped in Norway. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Limit your response to 500 tokens.

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

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

[[TITLE]]
"A Breath of Fresh Air or a Tank Full of Trouble: Exploring the Surprising Link Between Unhealthy Air Quality in Memphis and Gasoline Pumped in Norway"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research paper presents the findings of a comprehensive investigation into the intriguing link between unhealthy air quality in Memphis, Tennessee, and the gasoline consumption in Norway. Utilizing data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Information Administration, our research team conducted a thorough assessment of this unexpected connection. The analysis revealed a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.8300232 and p < 0.01 for the time period spanning from 1980 to 2022, shedding light on the unsuspected relationship between these seemingly disparate environmental factors. The implications of these findings extend beyond mere coincidence, presenting a novel and unanticipated perspective on the dynamics influencing air quality in Memphis and gasoline consumption in Norway. This study not only underscores the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration but also highlights the interconnectedness of global environmental factors.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The surprisingly strong correlation between unhealthy air quality in Memphis and the gasoline consumption in Norway has prompted a comprehensive review of existing literature and research studies. Smith and Doe (2010) conducted an extensive analysis of air quality in urban environments, shedding light on the factors contributing to elevated levels of pollutants. Their findings highlighted the complex interplay of industrial emissions, vehicular traffic, and atmospheric conditions, providing a solid foundation for understanding the challenges posed by air pollution in metropolitan areas. However, their study did not anticipate the unlikely connection with gasoline consumption in a distant Scandinavian country, adding an unexpected twist to their originally intended research focus.
Jones (2015) ventured into the realm of global energy consumption patterns, providing a detailed account of the diverse sources of fuel utilized around the world. The intricate web of geopolitical influences and resource availability elucidated by Jones (2015) deepened our understanding of the complex dynamics shaping energy consumption trends. Little did Jones know that his exploration of fuel usage would ultimately intersect with the seemingly unrelated issue of air quality in Memphis, creating a serendipitous fusion of environmental disciplines worthy of a plot twist in a suspenseful novel.
The works of non-fiction authors such as "The Air Pollution Dilemma" by G. Thomas and "Fueling the Future" by R. Johnson offer valuable insights into the challenges and opportunities presented by environmental pollution and energy consumption. However, one cannot help but wonder if the authors ever suspected that their scholarly pursuits would inadvertently converge in a comical collision of unrelated topics, akin to a fortuitous mishap in a sitcom plotline.
Turning to the realm of fiction, novels such as "The Air Affair" by J. Novel and "Fuel Frenzy" by S. Story blend environmental themes with imaginative storytelling. While these literary works may provide an escape from the rigors of academic research, they unwittingly mirror the uncanny connection between air quality in Memphis and gasoline consumption in Norway, almost as if the fictional narratives have leaped from the pages and manifested in the real world.
In a light-hearted exploration of popular culture, TV shows such as "Airbenders" and "Nordic Fuel Mysteries" offer entertainment value while inadvertently drawing attention to the unexpected intersection of air quality and gasoline usage. The creators of these shows likely never anticipated that their fictional narratives would bear a striking resemblance to the actual correlation observed in our research, blurring the line between scripted drama and empirical reality.
The convergence of unrelated disciplines in this peculiar association between Memphis' air quality and Norway's gasoline consumption has injected an element of whimsy into the otherwise serious realm of environmental research. As we delve deeper into the tangled web of interconnected environmental factors, it becomes increasingly evident that truth is indeed stranger than fiction, and the nexus between these disparate elements yields an unexpected comedic twist in the tapestry of academic inquiry.

[[RESULTS]]
Our analysis revealed a striking correlation between unhealthy air quality in Memphis and gasoline consumption in Norway, with a correlation coefficient of 0.8300232, an r-squared of 0.6889386, and a p-value less than 0.01 for the time period of 1980 to 2022. The scatterplot (Fig. 1) provides a visual representation of this robust correlation, resembling a snapshot of two unlikely acquaintances caught in a meaningful conversation.
The strength of this connection surpassed our initial expectations, akin to stumbling upon a hidden treasure trove of statistical significance in a vast sea of data. The surprising coherence between the air quality woes of Memphis and the gasoline indulgence of Norway not only challenges conventional notions but also presents a compelling case for further investigation into these seemingly incongruent environmental domains. It is as if the aroma of BBQ from Memphis and the fjord landscapes of Norway have engaged in an unprecedented dance, with gasoline consumption as the unexpected melody.
Our findings hold implications that extend beyond the realms of empirical observation, transcending into the domains of environmental policy and public awareness campaigns. This discovery serves as a reminder of the intertwined nature of global environmental factors, much like unearthing a hidden underground network of interconnected tunnels beneath the surface of conventional wisdom. It underscores the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration and the potential insights that arise from seeking connections in unexpected places, much like finding unexpected humor in a dry academic paper.
This revelation prompts a reevaluation of the intricate web of environmental interplay, urging us to embark on a journey of exploration and discovery, not unlike uncovering a long-lost recipe for an unlikely yet delectable dish. The results of this study emphasize the need for continued interdisciplinary research efforts and offer a fresh perspective on the complex dynamics that underpin environmental quality across geographical boundaries.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

The robust correlation between unhealthy air quality in Memphis and gasoline consumption in Norway, as unveiled in our findings, unfurls like an intriguing plot twist in a suspenseful novel. While the initial literature review may have seemed lighthearted, our results have lent unexpected credence to the seemingly comical connection between these disparate environmental factors.

The strength of the correlation, akin to that of a strong aroma rising from a casserole of unexpected ingredients, supports the prior research in surprising ways. Smith and Doe's analysis of urban air quality unwittingly laid the groundwork for our unforeseen discovery, akin to setting the stage for an unexpected rendezvous between unlikely characters. Meanwhile, Jones' exploration of global fuel usage inadvertently provided a backdrop for our revelation, much like the backdrop of a scenic fjord serving as an unexpected setting for an improbable encounter.

In light of our results, the unexpected link between Memphis' air quality and Norway's gasoline consumption has potential implications that extend beyond statistical significance. The findings echo the interconnected nature of global environmental factors, much like the unforeseen connections that surface in a convoluted narrative. These results underscore the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration and the potential insights that arise from seeking connections in unexpected places, much like discovering a hidden punchline in a dry academic paper.

Our research not only underscores the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration but also highlights the interconnectedness of global environmental factors, akin to stumbling upon unexpected humor in a serious setting. It prompts a reevaluation of the intricate web of environmental interplay, urging us to embark on a journey of exploration and discovery, not unlike uncovering a long-lost recipe for an unlikely yet delectable dish.

The results of this study emphasize the need for continued interdisciplinary research efforts and offer a fresh perspective—the kind that leads to a half-discovered punchline in a sea of seriousness— on the complex dynamics that underpin environmental quality across geographical boundaries.


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 Unhealthy air quality in Memphis and Gasoline pumped in Norway. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

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

Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
"A Breath of Fresh Air or a Tank Full of Trouble: Exploring the Surprising Link Between Unhealthy Air Quality in Memphis and Gasoline Pumped in Norway"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research paper presents the findings of a comprehensive investigation into the intriguing link between unhealthy air quality in Memphis, Tennessee, and the gasoline consumption in Norway. Utilizing data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Information Administration, our research team conducted a thorough assessment of this unexpected connection. The analysis revealed a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.8300232 and p < 0.01 for the time period spanning from 1980 to 2022, shedding light on the unsuspected relationship between these seemingly disparate environmental factors. The implications of these findings extend beyond mere coincidence, presenting a novel and unanticipated perspective on the dynamics influencing air quality in Memphis and gasoline consumption in Norway. This study not only underscores the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration but also highlights the interconnectedness of global environmental factors.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
INTRODUCTION
The discussion surrounding air quality and its impact on public health has long been a topic of global concern. In recent years, the burgeoning call for environmental sustainability and the mitigation of pollutants has led to a renaissance in the research realm, delving into the intricacies of air quality dynamics. Similarly, the global landscape of energy consumption and the associated environmental ramifications have spurred extensive investigations into the sources and effects of various fuel types. However, the peculiar interplay between the air quality in Memphis and the gasoline usage in Norway has remained a conundrum, eluding conventional understanding and warranting a thorough exploration.
While one might not instinctively associate the distinctive aromas permeating Memphis with the verdant landscapes of Norway, our research endeavors unveiled a striking correlation between the two. The seemingly disparate realms of air quality and gasoline consumption converged in an unexpected manner, much like finding a pair of mismatched socks in a drawer. The journey to unravel this baffling correspondence involved traversing diverse datasets and employing rigorous statistical analyses, akin to embarking on a scavenger hunt across the labyrinth of academic resources. Our efforts were not in vain, as the resulting findings unearthed an unequivocal link between these seemingly incongruous environmental facets.
The expository elucidation of this unanticipated relationship does not merely serve to pique the curiosity of academia and the public alike; it also underscores the interconnected nature of global environmental dynamics, much like discovering a hidden harmonious melody in the cacophony of discordant notes. This paper aims to elucidate the robustness of the correlation observed, shedding light on the tangled web of causation and influence that intertwines air quality in Memphis and gasoline consumption in Norway. Moreover, the implications of this study transcend the boundaries of mere academic inquiry, extending to policy interventions and public awareness initiatives, much like a ripple effect emanating from a pebble dropped in a serene pond.
In the subsequent sections, we will embark on a journey through the labyrinth of data, traversing the nuanced landscape of air quality assessment and gasoline utilization. Buckle up and prepare to navigate the twists and turns of this enigmatic nexus, much like embarking on an unexpectedly eventful road trip through uncharted territories. Our quest is not merely to illuminate this perplexing correlation but also to evoke a refreshed perspective on the intricate tapestry of environmental interconnections. A breath of fresh air or a tank full of trouble – let us unravel the mystery that binds Memphis and Norway in this unlikely environmental alliance.

[[RESULTS]]
Our analysis revealed a striking correlation between unhealthy air quality in Memphis and gasoline consumption in Norway, with a correlation coefficient of 0.8300232, an r-squared of 0.6889386, and a p-value less than 0.01 for the time period of 1980 to 2022. The scatterplot (Fig. 1) provides a visual representation of this robust correlation, resembling a snapshot of two unlikely acquaintances caught in a meaningful conversation.
The strength of this connection surpassed our initial expectations, akin to stumbling upon a hidden treasure trove of statistical significance in a vast sea of data. The surprising coherence between the air quality woes of Memphis and the gasoline indulgence of Norway not only challenges conventional notions but also presents a compelling case for further investigation into these seemingly incongruent environmental domains. It is as if the aroma of BBQ from Memphis and the fjord landscapes of Norway have engaged in an unprecedented dance, with gasoline consumption as the unexpected melody.
Our findings hold implications that extend beyond the realms of empirical observation, transcending into the domains of environmental policy and public awareness campaigns. This discovery serves as a reminder of the intertwined nature of global environmental factors, much like unearthing a hidden underground network of interconnected tunnels beneath the surface of conventional wisdom. It underscores the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration and the potential insights that arise from seeking connections in unexpected places, much like finding unexpected humor in a dry academic paper.
This revelation prompts a reevaluation of the intricate web of environmental interplay, urging us to embark on a journey of exploration and discovery, not unlike uncovering a long-lost recipe for an unlikely yet delectable dish. The results of this study emphasize the need for continued interdisciplinary research efforts and offer a fresh perspective on the complex dynamics that underpin environmental quality across geographical boundaries.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, our investigation into the surprising link between unhealthy air quality in Memphis and gasoline consumption in Norway has yielded significant insights. The robust correlation coefficient of 0.8300232, coupled with a p-value less than 0.01, underscores the unexpected intertwining of these seemingly incongruous environmental factors. It is as though the exhaust fumes from Memphis have found an unlikely companion in the gasoline indulgence of Norway, creating a harmony reminiscent of a peculiar yet captivating symphony.

The implications of these findings extend beyond conventional academic boundaries, much like a sudden plot twist in a predictable narrative. The interplay between air quality and gasoline consumption highlights the interconnected nature of global environmental dynamics, akin to stumbling upon a hidden gem in an unexpected place. This revelation prompts a reevaluation of the intricate web of environmental interplay, urging us to embark on a journey of exploration and discovery, not unlike uncovering a long-lost recipe for an unlikely yet delectable dish.

As such, we assert that no further research is needed in this area. The unexpected connection between unhealthy air quality in Memphis and gasoline pumped in Norway stands as a testament to the serendipitous discoveries that can arise from examining seemingly disparate phenomena. It is a reminder of the whimsical nature of scientific inquiry and the potential for unexpected connections in the most unlikely of places. Therefore, we believe it's time to park this particular inquiry and refuel our academic pursuits in other, equally surprising directions.


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 A Breath of Fresh Air or a Tank Full of Trouble: Exploring the Surprising Link Between Unhealthy Air Quality in Memphis and Gasoline Pumped in Norway. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Global Environmental Connections


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 A Breath of Fresh Air or a Tank Full of Trouble: Exploring the Surprising Link Between Unhealthy Air Quality in Memphis and Gasoline Pumped in Norway. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Institute for Global Air Quality and Sustainable Energy Solutions


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 A Breath of Fresh Air or a Tank Full of Trouble: Exploring the Surprising Link Between Unhealthy Air Quality in Memphis and Gasoline Pumped in Norway with an abstract of This research paper presents the findings of a comprehensive investigation into the intriguing link between unhealthy air quality in Memphis, Tennessee, and the gasoline consumption in Norway. Utilizing data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Information Administration, our research team conducted a thorough assessment of this unexpected connection. The analysis revealed a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.8300232 and p < 0.01 for the time period spanning from 1980 to 2022, shedding light on the unsuspected relationship between these seemingly disparate environmental factors. The implications of these findings extend beyond mere coincidence, presenting a novel and unanticipated perspective on the dynamics influencing air quality in Memphis and gasoline consumption in Norway. This study not only underscores the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration but also highlights the interconnectedness of global environmental factors.

ChatGPT:

"unhealthy air quality Memphis", "gasoline consumption Norway", "air pollution correlation", "environmental factors correlation", "global air quality research", "interconnected environmental factors", "unconventional environmental study", "cross-country air quality analysis", "EPA data analysis", "EIA statistics correlation"

*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 Memphis
Detailed data title: Percentage of days with air quality at 'unhealthy for sensitive groups' or worse in Memphis, TN-MS-AR
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
See what else correlates with Air pollution in Memphis

Gasoline pumped in Norway
Detailed data title: Volume of gasoline pumped consumed in Norway in millions of barrels per day
Source: Energy Information Administration
See what else correlates with Gasoline pumped in Norway

Correlation r = 0.8300232 (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 = 0.6889386 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 68.9% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Gasoline pumped in Norway) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Air pollution in Memphis) over the 43 years from 1980 through 2022.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 5.9E-12. 0.0000000000059252167813876180
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 0.83 in 5.9E-10% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 168,770,196,416 random variables You don't actually need 168 billion 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 42 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 42 because we have two variables measured over a period of 43 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.

[ 0.71, 0.9 ] 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.
1980198119821983198419851986198719881989199019911992199319941995199619971998199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022
Air pollution in Memphis (Bad air quality days)23.22415.616411.506816.986313.38810.684915.890419.452126.77612.602717.534212.054813.661212.054815.616418.904113.661213.97262020.27418.579215.890413.424713.15077.6502720.27413.698614.24666.557382.465756.575349.5890410.10931.369861.095891.369862.185791.095893.01371.369861.09291.917813.56164
Gasoline pumped in Norway (Million Barrels/Day)3432353634.513736.832939.358940.695941.049241.282241.38940.052139.106638.917839.030138.591839.04138.569938.964438.687737.396238.915138.52638.153437.819736.578135.18933.358931.213129.408228.386326.027424.355222.915121.852120.178119.756819.317818.742517.756216.685816.534215.211




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([23.224,15.6164,11.5068,16.9863,13.388,10.6849,15.8904,19.4521,26.776,12.6027,17.5342,12.0548,13.6612,12.0548,15.6164,18.9041,13.6612,13.9726,20,20.274,18.5792,15.8904,13.4247,13.1507,7.65027,20.274,13.6986,14.2466,6.55738,2.46575,6.57534,9.58904,10.1093,1.36986,1.09589,1.36986,2.18579,1.09589,3.0137,1.36986,1.0929,1.91781,3.56164,])
array_2 = np.array([34,32,35,36,34.5137,36.8329,39.3589,40.6959,41.0492,41.2822,41.389,40.0521,39.1066,38.9178,39.0301,38.5918,39.041,38.5699,38.9644,38.6877,37.3962,38.9151,38.526,38.1534,37.8197,36.5781,35.189,33.3589,31.2131,29.4082,28.3863,26.0274,24.3552,22.9151,21.8521,20.1781,19.7568,19.3178,18.7425,17.7562,16.6858,16.5342,15.211,])
array_1_name = "Air pollution in Memphis"
array_2_name = "Gasoline pumped in Norway"

# 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?

Kudos for rating!


Correlation ID: 2076 · Black Variable ID: 20886 · Red Variable ID: 24779
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0