about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #2,172 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Google searches for 'Practical Engineering' and the second variable is Season wins for the Detroit Lions.  The chart goes from 2007 to 2023, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As interest in practical engineering rose, so did the efficiency of the Detroit Lions' plays. It seems they finally learned how to put the 'mechanics' of the game to good use and 'engineer' a winning strategy. Who knew that the real key to their success was just a little bit of 'mechanical advantage' on the field!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: [ Symbolism ] A person sitting at their desk, typing "Practical Engineering" into the Google search bar on their computer while wearing a Detroit Lions football jersey that is covered with patches representing the team's journey through seasons (with wins and losses). The person's posture and surroundings should portray their dedication to seeking knowledge and improvement within the field of engineering, as well as their unwavering support for their team, despite challenges. The imagery should evoke the themes of determination, perseverance, and commitment to both professional growth and personal passions. 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: Google searches for 'Practical Engineering' and Season wins for the Detroit Lions. 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: 3D Pixar Style Oragami Symbolism Parallax art Psychedelic
ChatGPT: Symbolism

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 Google searches for 'Practical Engineering' and Season wins for the Detroit Lions together. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: A person sitting at their desk, typing "Practical Engineering" into the Google search bar on their computer while wearing a Detroit Lions football jersey that is covered in patches indicating the number of season wins.

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: [ Symbolism ] and depicting this scene: A person sitting at their desk, typing "Practical Engineering" into the Google search bar on their computer while wearing a Detroit Lions football jersey that is covered in patches indicating the number of season wins. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: [ Symbolism ] A person sitting at their desk, typing "Practical Engineering" into the Google search bar on their computer while wearing a Detroit Lions football jersey that is covered with patches representing the team's journey through seasons (with wins and losses). The person's posture and surroundings should portray their dedication to seeking knowledge and improvement within the field of engineering, as well as their unwavering support for their team, despite challenges. The imagery should evoke the themes of determination, perseverance, and commitment to both professional growth and personal passions.

*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 Practical Engineering (Google searches for 'Practical Engineering') caused Season wins for the Detroit Lions to increase. Include one good pun.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Practical Engineering Sleuthing: Does Googling It Help the Lions Start Ruling?

The Journal of Unconventional Engineering Research

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 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 Google searches for 'Practical Engineering' and Season wins for the Detroit Lions. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

Rhyme words in the title.

Your research team used data from Google Trends and Pro-Football-Reference.com to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.6733898 and p < 0.01 for 2007 to 2023.

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]]
Practical Engineering Sleuthing: Does Googling It Help the Lions Start Ruling?

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve into the seemingly unrelated realms of practical engineering curiosity and Detroit Lions' season victories to unearth a surprising connection that might just make you roar with laughter. Using data from Google Trends and Pro-Football-Reference.com, we set out to investigate the empirical linkage between the volume of Google searches for "Practical Engineering" and the number of wins for the Detroit Lions from 2007 to 2023. To our astonishment, we discovered a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.6733898 with p < 0.01, suggesting a positive association between the two variables.

Now, here comes the part where we present the punchline - it appears that the more people searched for practical engineering, the more likely the Detroit Lions were to notch up victories. It's almost as if the power of practical knowledge was foreshadowing the Lions' triumphs, creating a dynamic akin to the perfect quarterback pass - precise and unexpected!

So, why did the Detroit Lions become fans of practical engineering? Because they finally found something that made sense out of their season wins!


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a 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 Google searches for 'Practical Engineering' and Season wins for the Detroit Lions. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Practical Engineering Sleuthing: Does Googling It Help the Lions Start Ruling?

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve into the seemingly unrelated realms of practical engineering curiosity and Detroit Lions' season victories to unearth a surprising connection that might just make you roar with laughter. Using data from Google Trends and Pro-Football-Reference.com, we set out to investigate the empirical linkage between the volume of Google searches for "Practical Engineering" and the number of wins for the Detroit Lions from 2007 to 2023. To our astonishment, we discovered a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.6733898 with p < 0.01, suggesting a positive association between the two variables.

Now, here comes the part where we present the punchline - it appears that the more people searched for practical engineering, the more likely the Detroit Lions were to notch up victories. It's almost as if the power of practical knowledge was foreshadowing the Lions' triumphs, creating a dynamic akin to the perfect quarterback pass - precise and unexpected!

So, why did the Detroit Lions become fans of practical engineering? Because they finally found something that made sense out of their season wins!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

"Buckle up, folks, because in this paper, we're diving into the enthralling world of practical engineering and the enigmatic wins of the Detroit Lions. As we unravel the perplexing relationship between these two seemingly unrelated phenomena, prepare for a tale that will keep you on the edge of your seat - or rather, the edge of the bleachers.

Speaking of practical engineering, did you hear about the scientist who was reading a book on anti-gravity? He just couldn't put it down! And that's precisely the kind of gravitational pull we're exploring in this research – the gravitational pull of practical engineering on the Detroit Lions' victories.

Now, you might be wondering, why on earth would anyone want to study the connection between Google searches for 'Practical Engineering' and the Lions' season wins? Well, dear reader, the answer is simpler than a piece of pie - we're captivated by the unexpected, the unconventional, and the delightful nuances that emerge from statistical analysis. Think of us as the Sherlock Holmes of the academic world, only instead of a deerstalker hat, we're armed with spreadsheets and p-values.

Let's not beat around the bush - we've all been a little curious. After all, when it comes to research, curiosity is the spark that ignites the fire of discovery. It's like the scientist who accidentally discovered a way to keep his lab rats warm. It was a stroke of genius!

In this paper, we aim to take you on a journey that not only unearths an unanticipated association between practical engineering curiosity and the Lions' triumphs but also showcases the whimsical nature of statistical analysis. It's like finding a hidden gem in a haystack - only this time, the gem is the correlation coefficient and the haystack is the world of data.

What did the researcher say when his experiment failed? "If at first you don't succeed, then skydiving definitely isn't for you!" But fear not, dear reader, for in this study, we're poised to succeed and skydive into the hidden depths of data, uncovering the unexpected link between "Googling It" and the roar of the Lions in the football arena. So, saddle up, because it's about to get statistically wild!


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a 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 Google searches for 'Practical Engineering' and Season wins for the Detroit Lions. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

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

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

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then devolve ever further, and mention something completely ridiculous, like you conducted literature review by reading the backs of shampoo bottles.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Practical Engineering Sleuthing: Does Googling It Help the Lions Start Ruling?

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve into the seemingly unrelated realms of practical engineering curiosity and Detroit Lions' season victories to unearth a surprising connection that might just make you roar with laughter. Using data from Google Trends and Pro-Football-Reference.com, we set out to investigate the empirical linkage between the volume of Google searches for "Practical Engineering" and the number of wins for the Detroit Lions from 2007 to 2023. To our astonishment, we discovered a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.6733898 with p < 0.01, suggesting a positive association between the two variables.

Now, here comes the part where we present the punchline - it appears that the more people searched for practical engineering, the more likely the Detroit Lions were to notch up victories. It's almost as if the power of practical knowledge was foreshadowing the Lions' triumphs, creating a dynamic akin to the perfect quarterback pass - precise and unexpected!

So, why did the Detroit Lions become fans of practical engineering? Because they finally found something that made sense out of their season wins!

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
"Buckle up, folks, because in this paper, we're diving into the enthralling world of practical engineering and the enigmatic wins of the Detroit Lions. As we unravel the perplexing relationship between these two seemingly unrelated phenomena, prepare for a tale that will keep you on the edge of your seat - or rather, the edge of the bleachers.
Speaking of practical engineering, did you hear about the scientist who was reading a book on anti-gravity? He just couldn't put it down! And that's precisely the kind of gravitational pull we're exploring in this research – the gravitational pull of practical engineering on the Detroit Lions' victories.
Now, you might be wondering, why on earth would anyone want to study the connection between Google searches for 'Practical Engineering' and the Lions' season wins? Well, dear reader, the answer is simpler than a piece of pie - we're captivated by the unexpected, the unconventional, and the delightful nuances that emerge from statistical analysis. Think of us as the Sherlock Holmes of the academic world, only instead of a deerstalker hat, we're armed with spreadsheets and p-values.
Let's not beat around the bush - we've all been a little curious. After all, when it comes to research, curiosity is the spark that ignites the fire of discovery. It's like the scientist who accidentally discovered a way to keep his lab rats warm. It was a stroke of genius!
In this paper, we aim to take you on a journey that not only unearths an unanticipated association between practical engineering curiosity and the Lions' triumphs but also showcases the whimsical nature of statistical analysis. It's like finding a hidden gem in a haystack - only this time, the gem is the correlation coefficient and the haystack is the world of data.
What did the researcher say when his experiment failed? "If at first you don't succeed, then skydiving definitely isn't for you!" But fear not, dear reader, for in this study, we're poised to succeed and skydive into the hidden depths of data, uncovering the unexpected link between "Googling It" and the roar of the Lions in the football arena. So, saddle up, because it's about to get statistically wild!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The investigation into the connection between Google searches for 'Practical Engineering' and the Detroit Lions' season victories has prompted a diverse array of academic inquiries. In "Smith et al.," the authors find a direct relationship between the increased interest in practical engineering and a surge in problem-solving abilities. Similarly, "Doe and Jones" reveal a positive correlation between technical acumen and improved performance, albeit in a different context.

But what do you call a periodic table with a sense of humor? A "table of contents"! It seems that the correlation between practical engineering and victory might just be as elemental as a good chemistry joke.

As we venture into the domain of non-fiction literature, "The New Way Things Work" by David Macaulay and Neil Ardley illuminates the captivating essence of practical engineering. Similarly, "Engineering in the Mind's Eye" by Eugene S. Ferguson delves into the visual thinking processes that underpin practical engineering concepts.

However, it's not all serious business; who doesn't enjoy a good piece of fiction now and then? "The Martian" by Andy Weir and "The Elegance of the Hedgehog" by Muriel Barbery may not directly relate to engineering or football victories, but they remind us of the immeasurable power of unexpected connections - much like the unanticipated relationship we're about to reveal.

But as the literature review widens its scope, it's only fitting to acknowledge the unconventional sources of insight. While we didn't consult the tea leaves or the back of cereal boxes, we did entertain unconventional sources of inspiration. Though we can't present empirical findings from the backs of shampoo bottles, we assure you that our approach was scientifically sound and thoroughly entertained the realms of possibility.

In conclusion, the literature surrounding the study's focal points may seem disparate at first glance, but our findings reveal a unifying thread that binds together the practicality of engineering with the triumphs of the Detroit Lions. Much like a well-constructed punchline, this connection unfolds in a manner that surprises and delights - leaving us with a deeper appreciation for the whimsical nature of statistical inquiry.

Why did the mathematician refuse to make a bad pun? Because it just didn't add up. But fear not, dear reader, for our investigation found the perfect balance between statistical rigor and good old-fashioned humor.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a 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 Google searches for 'Practical Engineering' and Season wins for the Detroit Lions. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Google Trends and Pro-Football-Reference.com . You used data from 2007 to 2023

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]]
Practical Engineering Sleuthing: Does Googling It Help the Lions Start Ruling?

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve into the seemingly unrelated realms of practical engineering curiosity and Detroit Lions' season victories to unearth a surprising connection that might just make you roar with laughter. Using data from Google Trends and Pro-Football-Reference.com, we set out to investigate the empirical linkage between the volume of Google searches for "Practical Engineering" and the number of wins for the Detroit Lions from 2007 to 2023. To our astonishment, we discovered a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.6733898 with p < 0.01, suggesting a positive association between the two variables.

Now, here comes the part where we present the punchline - it appears that the more people searched for practical engineering, the more likely the Detroit Lions were to notch up victories. It's almost as if the power of practical knowledge was foreshadowing the Lions' triumphs, creating a dynamic akin to the perfect quarterback pass - precise and unexpected!

So, why did the Detroit Lions become fans of practical engineering? Because they finally found something that made sense out of their season wins!

[[INTRODUCTION]]
"Buckle up, folks, because in this paper, we're diving into the enthralling world of practical engineering and the enigmatic wins of the Detroit Lions. As we unravel the perplexing relationship between these two seemingly unrelated phenomena, prepare for a tale that will keep you on the edge of your seat - or rather, the edge of the bleachers.
Speaking of practical engineering, did you hear about the scientist who was reading a book on anti-gravity? He just couldn't put it down! And that's precisely the kind of gravitational pull we're exploring in this research – the gravitational pull of practical engineering on the Detroit Lions' victories.
Now, you might be wondering, why on earth would anyone want to study the connection between Google searches for 'Practical Engineering' and the Lions' season wins? Well, dear reader, the answer is simpler than a piece of pie - we're captivated by the unexpected, the unconventional, and the delightful nuances that emerge from statistical analysis. Think of us as the Sherlock Holmes of the academic world, only instead of a deerstalker hat, we're armed with spreadsheets and p-values.
Let's not beat around the bush - we've all been a little curious. After all, when it comes to research, curiosity is the spark that ignites the fire of discovery. It's like the scientist who accidentally discovered a way to keep his lab rats warm. It was a stroke of genius!
In this paper, we aim to take you on a journey that not only unearths an unanticipated association between practical engineering curiosity and the Lions' triumphs but also showcases the whimsical nature of statistical analysis. It's like finding a hidden gem in a haystack - only this time, the gem is the correlation coefficient and the haystack is the world of data.
What did the researcher say when his experiment failed? "If at first you don't succeed, then skydiving definitely isn't for you!" But fear not, dear reader, for in this study, we're poised to succeed and skydive into the hidden depths of data, uncovering the unexpected link between "Googling It" and the roar of the Lions in the football arena. So, saddle up, because it's about to get statistically wild!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To unravel the elusive connection between the practical ponderings of engineering enthusiasts and the gridiron exploits of the Detroit Lions, we embarked on a convoluted journey filled with data crunching, statistical acrobatics, and an occasional detour into the realm of unexpected correlations.

Firstly, we harnessed the enigmatic powers of Google Trends to extract the search interest data for the term 'Practical Engineering' from the year 2007 to 2023. This curious quest through the virtual depths of cyberspace revealed the ebb and flow of practical engineering curiosity, akin to piecing together an intricate puzzle where the pieces were statistical nuggets waiting to be assembled.

Next, we delved into the pigskin-laden world of Pro-Football-Reference.com to extract the wins of the Detroit Lions over the same time span. Much like a well-executed play on the football field, we meticulously combed through the data, ensuring that no triumph or defeat went unnoticed.

Now, here comes the twist - in a whimsical twist of fate, we concocted a statistical potion, also known as the Pearson correlation coefficient, to discern the relationship between the volume of Google searches for 'Practical Engineering' and the number of victories notched by the Detroit Lions. We then raised the curtain to reveal a correlation coefficient of 0.6733898 with a p-value of less than 0.01, implying a robust association that left us more awe-stricken than a Hail Mary touchdown pass!

Of course, no scientific escapade is complete without a touch of elegance, so we employed a time-series analysis to observe the fluctuating trends in both practical engineering searches and the Lions' wins. This analytical waltz allowed us to capture the nuanced rhythm of these variables over time, akin to a painstakingly choreographed performance that left the audience yearning for an encore.

In the realm of statistical analyses, every variation and deviation is akin to a plot twist in a mystery novel, adding layers of intrigue to the narrative. Therefore, armed with multivariate regression models, we endeavored to disentangle the web of causal relationships, unraveling the intricate dance between practical knowledge pursuit and the Lions' triumphs like a sleuth in a classic whodunit, only the culprit here being the unexpected connection between seemingly unrelated variables.

So, dear reader, as we lift the curtain on our methodology, we hope you find our scientific shenanigans as thrilling as a last-minute game-winning field goal - the unexpected twists and turns, the statistical sleight of hand, and of course, the occasional dad joke to keep the academic atmosphere delightfully light-hearted.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a 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 Google searches for 'Practical Engineering' and Season wins for the Detroit Lions. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Google Trends and Pro-Football-Reference.com .

For the time period 2007 to 2023, you found a correlation 0.6733898, r-squared of 0.4534539, 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]]
Practical Engineering Sleuthing: Does Googling It Help the Lions Start Ruling?

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve into the seemingly unrelated realms of practical engineering curiosity and Detroit Lions' season victories to unearth a surprising connection that might just make you roar with laughter. Using data from Google Trends and Pro-Football-Reference.com, we set out to investigate the empirical linkage between the volume of Google searches for "Practical Engineering" and the number of wins for the Detroit Lions from 2007 to 2023. To our astonishment, we discovered a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.6733898 with p < 0.01, suggesting a positive association between the two variables.

Now, here comes the part where we present the punchline - it appears that the more people searched for practical engineering, the more likely the Detroit Lions were to notch up victories. It's almost as if the power of practical knowledge was foreshadowing the Lions' triumphs, creating a dynamic akin to the perfect quarterback pass - precise and unexpected!

So, why did the Detroit Lions become fans of practical engineering? Because they finally found something that made sense out of their season wins!

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
"Buckle up, folks, because in this paper, we're diving into the enthralling world of practical engineering and the enigmatic wins of the Detroit Lions. As we unravel the perplexing relationship between these two seemingly unrelated phenomena, prepare for a tale that will keep you on the edge of your seat - or rather, the edge of the bleachers.
Speaking of practical engineering, did you hear about the scientist who was reading a book on anti-gravity? He just couldn't put it down! And that's precisely the kind of gravitational pull we're exploring in this research – the gravitational pull of practical engineering on the Detroit Lions' victories.
Now, you might be wondering, why on earth would anyone want to study the connection between Google searches for 'Practical Engineering' and the Lions' season wins? Well, dear reader, the answer is simpler than a piece of pie - we're captivated by the unexpected, the unconventional, and the delightful nuances that emerge from statistical analysis. Think of us as the Sherlock Holmes of the academic world, only instead of a deerstalker hat, we're armed with spreadsheets and p-values.
Let's not beat around the bush - we've all been a little curious. After all, when it comes to research, curiosity is the spark that ignites the fire of discovery. It's like the scientist who accidentally discovered a way to keep his lab rats warm. It was a stroke of genius!
In this paper, we aim to take you on a journey that not only unearths an unanticipated association between practical engineering curiosity and the Lions' triumphs but also showcases the whimsical nature of statistical analysis. It's like finding a hidden gem in a haystack - only this time, the gem is the correlation coefficient and the haystack is the world of data.
What did the researcher say when his experiment failed? "If at first you don't succeed, then skydiving definitely isn't for you!" But fear not, dear reader, for in this study, we're poised to succeed and skydive into the hidden depths of data, uncovering the unexpected link between "Googling It" and the roar of the Lions in the football arena. So, saddle up, because it's about to get statistically wild!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The investigation into the relationship between Google searches for "Practical Engineering" and the season wins for the Detroit Lions from 2007 to 2023 yielded a surprisingly robust correlation. We found a correlation coefficient of 0.6733898, an r-squared value of 0.4534539, and a p-value of less than 0.01, indicating a statistically significant positive association between these two seemingly disparate variables. It's almost as if the Lions were engineering their path to victory through the power of practical knowledge! Talk about a winning strategy!

Now, onto the fun part - the figures! Figure 1, the scatterplot depicting the bountiful correlation between Google searches for "Practical Engineering" and the Detroit Lions' wins, showcases a trend as clear as a sunny day on the football field. If only football games were as predictable as this correlation, we'd all be raking in Super Bowl bets!

This unexpected connection between practical engineering curiosity and the Lions' victories begs the question - was "Googling It" the secret playbook for the Lions all along? It seems that when the engineering enthusiasts were firing up their search engines, the Lions were firing up their winning plays on the field. The synergy between these two elements is so palpable, it's like a perfectly synchronized handoff between quarterback and running back – seamless and undoubtedly strategic.

So, why did the Detroit Lions become fans of practical engineering? Because they finally found something that made sense out of their season wins! It's as if they've discovered the winning formula to engineer their way to victories!


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a 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 Google searches for 'Practical Engineering' and Season wins for the Detroit Lions. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

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]]
Practical Engineering Sleuthing: Does Googling It Help the Lions Start Ruling?

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve into the seemingly unrelated realms of practical engineering curiosity and Detroit Lions' season victories to unearth a surprising connection that might just make you roar with laughter. Using data from Google Trends and Pro-Football-Reference.com, we set out to investigate the empirical linkage between the volume of Google searches for "Practical Engineering" and the number of wins for the Detroit Lions from 2007 to 2023. To our astonishment, we discovered a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.6733898 with p < 0.01, suggesting a positive association between the two variables.

Now, here comes the part where we present the punchline - it appears that the more people searched for practical engineering, the more likely the Detroit Lions were to notch up victories. It's almost as if the power of practical knowledge was foreshadowing the Lions' triumphs, creating a dynamic akin to the perfect quarterback pass - precise and unexpected!

So, why did the Detroit Lions become fans of practical engineering? Because they finally found something that made sense out of their season wins!

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The investigation into the connection between Google searches for 'Practical Engineering' and the Detroit Lions' season victories has prompted a diverse array of academic inquiries. In "Smith et al.," the authors find a direct relationship between the increased interest in practical engineering and a surge in problem-solving abilities. Similarly, "Doe and Jones" reveal a positive correlation between technical acumen and improved performance, albeit in a different context.
But what do you call a periodic table with a sense of humor? A "table of contents"! It seems that the correlation between practical engineering and victory might just be as elemental as a good chemistry joke.
As we venture into the domain of non-fiction literature, "The New Way Things Work" by David Macaulay and Neil Ardley illuminates the captivating essence of practical engineering. Similarly, "Engineering in the Mind's Eye" by Eugene S. Ferguson delves into the visual thinking processes that underpin practical engineering concepts.
However, it's not all serious business; who doesn't enjoy a good piece of fiction now and then? "The Martian" by Andy Weir and "The Elegance of the Hedgehog" by Muriel Barbery may not directly relate to engineering or football victories, but they remind us of the immeasurable power of unexpected connections - much like the unanticipated relationship we're about to reveal.
But as the literature review widens its scope, it's only fitting to acknowledge the unconventional sources of insight. While we didn't consult the tea leaves or the back of cereal boxes, we did entertain unconventional sources of inspiration. Though we can't present empirical findings from the backs of shampoo bottles, we assure you that our approach was scientifically sound and thoroughly entertained the realms of possibility.
In conclusion, the literature surrounding the study's focal points may seem disparate at first glance, but our findings reveal a unifying thread that binds together the practicality of engineering with the triumphs of the Detroit Lions. Much like a well-constructed punchline, this connection unfolds in a manner that surprises and delights - leaving us with a deeper appreciation for the whimsical nature of statistical inquiry.
Why did the mathematician refuse to make a bad pun? Because it just didn't add up. But fear not, dear reader, for our investigation found the perfect balance between statistical rigor and good old-fashioned humor.

[[RESULTS]]
The investigation into the relationship between Google searches for "Practical Engineering" and the season wins for the Detroit Lions from 2007 to 2023 yielded a surprisingly robust correlation. We found a correlation coefficient of 0.6733898, an r-squared value of 0.4534539, and a p-value of less than 0.01, indicating a statistically significant positive association between these two seemingly disparate variables. It's almost as if the Lions were engineering their path to victory through the power of practical knowledge! Talk about a winning strategy!
Now, onto the fun part - the figures! Figure 1, the scatterplot depicting the bountiful correlation between Google searches for "Practical Engineering" and the Detroit Lions' wins, showcases a trend as clear as a sunny day on the football field. If only football games were as predictable as this correlation, we'd all be raking in Super Bowl bets!
This unexpected connection between practical engineering curiosity and the Lions' victories begs the question - was "Googling It" the secret playbook for the Lions all along? It seems that when the engineering enthusiasts were firing up their search engines, the Lions were firing up their winning plays on the field. The synergy between these two elements is so palpable, it's like a perfectly synchronized handoff between quarterback and running back – seamless and undoubtedly strategic.
So, why did the Detroit Lions become fans of practical engineering? Because they finally found something that made sense out of their season wins! It's as if they've discovered the winning formula to engineer their way to victories!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The findings of our study offer a compelling insight into the unanticipated relationship between the volume of Google searches for "Practical Engineering" and the number of wins for the Detroit Lions. Our results not only support but also extend the existing literature, echoing the sentiment that practical engineering has a role to play in bolstering success, whether on the playing field or in the problem-solving realm. It's as if the Lions were taking a crash course in engineering excellence – talk about a fumble-free game plan!

Our results align with the work of "Smith et al.," which posited a direct link between practical knowledge acquisition and enhanced problem-solving abilities. In the case of the Detroit Lions, it appears that the surge in practical engineering curiosity acted as a beacon of good fortune, guiding them to an array of victories on the field. It's almost as if they were harnessing the laws of physics to launch themselves into the win column!

Similarly, the positive correlation revealed in our study resonates with "Doe and Jones," who highlighted the empowering influence of technical acumen on performance. The Detroit Lions seem to have tapped into the power of practical knowledge as a key asset in their arsenal, much like a team diligently mastering the fundamentals to gain a competitive edge. It's as if they've engineered themselves into a winning streak – now that's what I call an equation for success!

The surprising connection we uncovered underscores the value of unexpected correlations and the intriguing interplay between diverse domains. Just as "The Martian" and "The Elegance of the Hedgehog" reminded us of the unanticipated power of unforeseen connections, our study has unearthed a bewildering yet undeniably palpable link between practical engineering curiosity and the triumphs of the Detroit Lions. It's as if the humorous yet critical nature of science has presented the world with a whimsical statistical pun – a revelation that's as delightful as it is enlightening!

In essence, our investigation has surfaced an unconventional but sagacious truth – the resonance between practical engineering and the Detroit Lions' wins is as tangible as the laws of physics governing our world. Our findings underscore the capacity of seemingly disparate factors to influence one another in ways that mirror the depth and complexity of intersecting variables in the scientific realm. It's as if the principles of practical engineering were guiding the Lions toward victories, acting as a practical playbook for their triumphs!

So, why did the Detroit Lions become fans of practical engineering and Google searches? Because they finally found something that made sense out of their season wins! It seems that the power of practical knowledge was driving the Lions toward glory, creating an alliance as potent and captivating as the most ingenious of scientific discoveries. As we march onward, let our unexpected findings remind us to embrace the humor and curiosity in scientific inquiry – for who knows what enthralling correlations may lie around the corner, waiting to be discovered?

And always remember – the only way for the Detroit Lions is up… unless they're in the middle of a winning streak!


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a 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 Google searches for 'Practical Engineering' and Season wins for the Detroit Lions. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

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]]
Practical Engineering Sleuthing: Does Googling It Help the Lions Start Ruling?

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve into the seemingly unrelated realms of practical engineering curiosity and Detroit Lions' season victories to unearth a surprising connection that might just make you roar with laughter. Using data from Google Trends and Pro-Football-Reference.com, we set out to investigate the empirical linkage between the volume of Google searches for "Practical Engineering" and the number of wins for the Detroit Lions from 2007 to 2023. To our astonishment, we discovered a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.6733898 with p < 0.01, suggesting a positive association between the two variables.

Now, here comes the part where we present the punchline - it appears that the more people searched for practical engineering, the more likely the Detroit Lions were to notch up victories. It's almost as if the power of practical knowledge was foreshadowing the Lions' triumphs, creating a dynamic akin to the perfect quarterback pass - precise and unexpected!

So, why did the Detroit Lions become fans of practical engineering? Because they finally found something that made sense out of their season wins!

[[INTRDUCTION]]
"Buckle up, folks, because in this paper, we're diving into the enthralling world of practical engineering and the enigmatic wins of the Detroit Lions. As we unravel the perplexing relationship between these two seemingly unrelated phenomena, prepare for a tale that will keep you on the edge of your seat - or rather, the edge of the bleachers.
Speaking of practical engineering, did you hear about the scientist who was reading a book on anti-gravity? He just couldn't put it down! And that's precisely the kind of gravitational pull we're exploring in this research – the gravitational pull of practical engineering on the Detroit Lions' victories.
Now, you might be wondering, why on earth would anyone want to study the connection between Google searches for 'Practical Engineering' and the Lions' season wins? Well, dear reader, the answer is simpler than a piece of pie - we're captivated by the unexpected, the unconventional, and the delightful nuances that emerge from statistical analysis. Think of us as the Sherlock Holmes of the academic world, only instead of a deerstalker hat, we're armed with spreadsheets and p-values.
Let's not beat around the bush - we've all been a little curious. After all, when it comes to research, curiosity is the spark that ignites the fire of discovery. It's like the scientist who accidentally discovered a way to keep his lab rats warm. It was a stroke of genius!
In this paper, we aim to take you on a journey that not only unearths an unanticipated association between practical engineering curiosity and the Lions' triumphs but also showcases the whimsical nature of statistical analysis. It's like finding a hidden gem in a haystack - only this time, the gem is the correlation coefficient and the haystack is the world of data.
What did the researcher say when his experiment failed? "If at first you don't succeed, then skydiving definitely isn't for you!" But fear not, dear reader, for in this study, we're poised to succeed and skydive into the hidden depths of data, uncovering the unexpected link between "Googling It" and the roar of the Lions in the football arena. So, saddle up, because it's about to get statistically wild!

[[RESULTS]]
The investigation into the relationship between Google searches for "Practical Engineering" and the season wins for the Detroit Lions from 2007 to 2023 yielded a surprisingly robust correlation. We found a correlation coefficient of 0.6733898, an r-squared value of 0.4534539, and a p-value of less than 0.01, indicating a statistically significant positive association between these two seemingly disparate variables. It's almost as if the Lions were engineering their path to victory through the power of practical knowledge! Talk about a winning strategy!
Now, onto the fun part - the figures! Figure 1, the scatterplot depicting the bountiful correlation between Google searches for "Practical Engineering" and the Detroit Lions' wins, showcases a trend as clear as a sunny day on the football field. If only football games were as predictable as this correlation, we'd all be raking in Super Bowl bets!
This unexpected connection between practical engineering curiosity and the Lions' victories begs the question - was "Googling It" the secret playbook for the Lions all along? It seems that when the engineering enthusiasts were firing up their search engines, the Lions were firing up their winning plays on the field. The synergy between these two elements is so palpable, it's like a perfectly synchronized handoff between quarterback and running back – seamless and undoubtedly strategic.
So, why did the Detroit Lions become fans of practical engineering? Because they finally found something that made sense out of their season wins! It's as if they've discovered the winning formula to engineer their way to victories!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our study has shed light on the remarkably coherent correlation between Google searches for "Practical Engineering" and the Detroit Lions' wins, uncovering a comedic plot twist worthy of a Hollywood blockbuster. The statistically significant association between these two variables has left us pondering the true essence of football brilliance - a blueprint crafted not just on the field, but also in the cyberspace of practical knowledge. It's like the Lions were taking a crash course in victory!

So, why did the Detroit Lions become fans of practical engineering? Because they finally found something that made sense out of their season wins! It's almost as if the Lions were scoping out the game plan and play-by-play breakdowns of success in the most unexpected of places. Who would have thought that the key to their victories lay in the practical depths of engineering fascination?

After unearthing this unexpected connection, it seems that further research in this area might be akin to a futile quest for a football in a haystack. As such, we assert that no more research is needed in this field. It's time to let the Lions revel in their newfound engineering wisdom and for us to appreciate the whimsical nuances of statistical exploration. And remember, when it comes to unexpected correlations, the data might just throw in a touchdown pass when you least expect it!


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 Practical Engineering Sleuthing: Does Googling It Help the Lions Start Ruling?. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Unconventional Engineering Research


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 Practical Engineering Sleuthing: Does Googling It Help the Lions Start Ruling?. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

Innovation Institute for Quirky Research


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide potential search keywords separated by commas. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide potential search keywords for a paper titled Practical Engineering Sleuthing: Does Googling It Help the Lions Start Ruling? with an abstract of In this study, we delve into the seemingly unrelated realms of practical engineering curiosity and Detroit Lions' season victories to unearth a surprising connection that might just make you roar with laughter. Using data from Google Trends and Pro-Football-Reference.com, we set out to investigate the empirical linkage between the volume of Google searches for "Practical Engineering" and the number of wins for the Detroit Lions from 2007 to 2023. To our astonishment, we discovered a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.6733898 with p < 0.01, suggesting a positive association between the two variables.
Now, here comes the part where we present the punchline - it appears that the more people searched for practical engineering, the more likely the Detroit Lions were to notch up victories. It's almost as if the power of practical knowledge was foreshadowing the Lions' triumphs, creating a dynamic akin to the perfect quarterback pass - precise and unexpected!
So, why did the Detroit Lions become fans of practical engineering? Because they finally found something that made sense out of their season wins!

ChatGPT:

practical engineering, Detroit Lions, Google Trends, Pro-Football-Reference.com, correlation coefficient, empirical linkage, season victories, statistical significance, search volume, data analysis

*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

Google searches for 'Practical Engineering'
Detailed data title: Relative volume of Google searches for 'Practical Engineering' (Worldwide, without quotes)
Source: Google Trends
Additional Info: Relative search volume (not absolute numbers)

See what else correlates with Google searches for 'Practical Engineering'

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

Correlation r = 0.6733898 (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 = 0.4534539 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 45.3% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Season wins for the Detroit Lions) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Google searches for 'Practical Engineering') over the 17 years from 2007 through 2023.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.00305. 0.0030450623310081457000000000
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 0.67 in 0.305% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 328 random variables Which I absolutely did.
with the same 16 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 16 because we have two variables measured over a period of 17 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.

[ 0.28, 0.87 ] 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.
20072008200920102011201220132014201520162017201820192020202120222023
Google searches for 'Practical Engineering' (Rel. search volume)46.2547.083346.583354.833353.166762.561.833373.56970.570.256156.66674959.579.166778.9167
Season wins for the Detroit Lions (Lions wins)70261047117996353910




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([46.25,47.0833,46.5833,54.8333,53.1667,62.5,61.8333,73.5,69,70.5,70.25,61,56.6667,49,59.5,79.1667,78.9167,])
array_2 = np.array([7,0,2,6,10,4,7,11,7,9,9,6,3,5,3,9,10,])
array_1_name = "Google searches for 'Practical Engineering'"
array_2_name = "Season wins for the Detroit Lions"

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

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



Reuseable content

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

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

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

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

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

Download images for these variables:


View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Your dedication to rating warms my heart!


Correlation ID: 2172 · Black Variable ID: 1451 · Red Variable ID: 19658
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0