about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #2,710 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Wind power generated in Latvia and the second variable is Number of Lawyers in the United States.  The chart goes from 1996 to 2021, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As wind turbines in Latvia spun faster, they created a unique low-frequency hum that resonated with the subconscious minds of people in the US, prompting more individuals to pursue a career in law. It's like the turbines were inadvertently broadcasting the message, "Sue-eee, Sue-eee, Sue-eee" across the seas, leading to a gust of interest in legal matters. The unforeseen legal windfall from Latvia left many baffled, as the connection between renewable energy and the influx of lawyers blew their minds.

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Create an image of a vibrant cyberpunk cityscape. Neon lights and holographic advertisements pepper the skyline, while sleek, futuristic buildings stretch into the sky. In the foreground, towering wind turbines rise from the urban landscape, their blades slicing through the smog-filled air. The turbines are a stark contrast against the high-tech city backdrop, symbolizing the integration of sustainable energy into the cyberpunk world. Meanwhile, silhouettes of determined lawyers stand on the sidewalk, their expressions resolute as they prepare to enter a grand courthouse. The juxtaposition of renewable energy and legal empowerment in this futuristic setting highlights the alliance between technology, environmental advocacy, and the relentless pursuit of progress. 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: Wind power generated in Latvia and Number of Lawyers in the United States. 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: An image that looks like it is a scene from A Disney Movie Cutsy art illustration Macabre Cyberpunk Cyberpunk
ChatGPT: Cyberpunk

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 Wind power generated in Latvia and Number of Lawyers in the United States, in the following situation: Because wind power generated in Latvia has caused a surge in renewable energy technology, leading to heightened awareness of environmental sustainability. This, in turn, has inspired more people to pursue law careers with a focus on environmental advocacy and renewable energy law. Therefore, the number of lawyers in the United States has increased as a result of Latvia's wind power generation.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a serene countryside landscape in Latvia, rows of elegant wind turbines majestically spin under the clear blue sky, generating sustainable wind power. In a bustling city in the United States, a line of determined lawyers stands before a grand courthouse, ready to advocate for environmental sustainability and renewable energy laws. The wind power generated in Latvia has sparked a surge in renewable energy technology and inspired a growing number of lawyers in the United States to champion environmental advocacy, creating a powerful alliance between sustainability and legal empowerment.

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: [ Cyberpunk ] and depicting this scene: In a serene countryside landscape in Latvia, rows of elegant wind turbines majestically spin under the clear blue sky, generating sustainable wind power. In a bustling city in the United States, a line of determined lawyers stands before a grand courthouse, ready to advocate for environmental sustainability and renewable energy laws. The wind power generated in Latvia has sparked a surge in renewable energy technology and inspired a growing number of lawyers in the United States to champion environmental advocacy, creating a powerful alliance between sustainability and legal empowerment. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Create an image of a vibrant cyberpunk cityscape. Neon lights and holographic advertisements pepper the skyline, while sleek, futuristic buildings stretch into the sky. In the foreground, towering wind turbines rise from the urban landscape, their blades slicing through the smog-filled air. The turbines are a stark contrast against the high-tech city backdrop, symbolizing the integration of sustainable energy into the cyberpunk world. Meanwhile, silhouettes of determined lawyers stand on the sidewalk, their expressions resolute as they prepare to enter a grand courthouse. The juxtaposition of renewable energy and legal empowerment in this futuristic setting highlights the alliance between technology, environmental advocacy, and the relentless pursuit of progress.

*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 Wind power generated in Latvia caused Number of Lawyers in the United States to increase.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Windy Whims: Weaving Wind Power in Latvia with the Lawyers' Load in the US

Journal of Renewable Energy Law and Policy

Jan 2024

Reminder: This paper is AI-generated. Not real!
Quick note: This sequence is long and repetitive. That's how the prompt engineering works for this one. I manage the output in Python to format it into this PDF.




Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You write titles and abstracts of goofy academic research papers.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, and add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Wind power generated in Latvia and Number of Lawyers in the United States. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Make the title an alliteration.

Your research team used data from Energy Information Administration and ABA to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9523915 and p < 0.01 for 1996 to 2021.

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]]
Windy Whims: Weaving Wind Power in Latvia with the Lawyers' Load in the US

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research article delves into the unexpected and seemingly improbable link between wind power generated in Latvia and the number of lawyers in the United States. Utilizing data from the Energy Information Administration and the American Bar Association, we sought to unravel this whimsical correlation. Through rigorous statistical analysis, we found a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9523915 and a p-value less than 0.01 for the period of 1996 to 2021, suggesting a remarkably strong relationship between these seemingly disparate variables. While causation cannot be inferred from our findings, the conspicuous connection between wind power in Latvia and the abundance of lawyers in the US beckons for further investigation. We hope that this lighthearted yet insightful study sparks intrigue and encourages researchers to embrace the unexpected in their pursuit of knowledge.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft the introduction section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Wind power generated in Latvia and Number of Lawyers in the United States. Make lots of 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]]
Windy Whims: Weaving Wind Power in Latvia with the Lawyers' Load in the US

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research article delves into the unexpected and seemingly improbable link between wind power generated in Latvia and the number of lawyers in the United States. Utilizing data from the Energy Information Administration and the American Bar Association, we sought to unravel this whimsical correlation. Through rigorous statistical analysis, we found a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9523915 and a p-value less than 0.01 for the period of 1996 to 2021, suggesting a remarkably strong relationship between these seemingly disparate variables. While causation cannot be inferred from our findings, the conspicuous connection between wind power in Latvia and the abundance of lawyers in the US beckons for further investigation. We hope that this lighthearted yet insightful study sparks intrigue and encourages researchers to embrace the unexpected in their pursuit of knowledge.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

As the old saying goes, "the winds of change are blowing," and in the realm of research, some unexpected gusts have led us to a rather peculiar inquiry – the connection between wind power in Latvia and the number of lawyers in the United States. While this topic may initially appear as substantial as a breeze in a teacup, our comprehensive analysis revealed a surprising and robust relationship between these two seemingly unrelated entities. Through this study, we aim to shed light on this unusual correlation and challenge the traditional confines of research inquiry.

Wind power, a renewable energy source, has been gaining momentum globally, and Latvia has emerged as a notable player in this domain. On the other side of the globe, the United States boasts a significant legal community, with a substantial number of lawyers navigating the intricate web of statutes and regulations. At first glance, one might legitimately inquire – how could these two disparate domains possibly intersect?

Our research journey begins with an exploration of the windswept landscapes of Latvia, where the whirring blades of wind turbines harness the kinetic energy from the atmosphere, translating it into electricity. Meanwhile, in the legal corridors of the United States, lawyers navigate the complexities of the judicial system, hence, leading to intermittent gales of jokes and puns in legal proceedings.

As we delved deeper into the data, our endeavors uncovered a remarkable correlation between wind power generation in Latvia and the number of lawyers in the United States. While the causative link remains elusive like a breeze that slips through one's fingers, the statistical significance of this relationship left us intrigued and rattled our methodological foundations, much like a sudden squall at sea.

The aim of this paper is not merely to present an unconventional correlation, but to encourage researchers to embrace the unexpected and whimsical in their pursuit of knowledge. We hope that our findings inspire scholars to cast their analytical nets into uncharted waters, much like the capricious yet captivating breezes that traverse the Latvian landscape.

With this in mind, we embark on our journey to unveil the enigmatic connection between wind power in Latvia and the abundance of lawyers in the United States, aiming to provoke curiosity and a sense of adventure in the pursuit of scholarly endeavors.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft a literature review section of an academic research paper, that starts out dry for the first few sentences but then becomes hilarious and goofy.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Wind power generated in Latvia and Number of Lawyers in the United States. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

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

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Perhaps you also got inspiration from some board games that are vaugely related.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Windy Whims: Weaving Wind Power in Latvia with the Lawyers' Load in the US

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research article delves into the unexpected and seemingly improbable link between wind power generated in Latvia and the number of lawyers in the United States. Utilizing data from the Energy Information Administration and the American Bar Association, we sought to unravel this whimsical correlation. Through rigorous statistical analysis, we found a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9523915 and a p-value less than 0.01 for the period of 1996 to 2021, suggesting a remarkably strong relationship between these seemingly disparate variables. While causation cannot be inferred from our findings, the conspicuous connection between wind power in Latvia and the abundance of lawyers in the US beckons for further investigation. We hope that this lighthearted yet insightful study sparks intrigue and encourages researchers to embrace the unexpected in their pursuit of knowledge.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
As the old saying goes, "the winds of change are blowing," and in the realm of research, some unexpected gusts have led us to a rather peculiar inquiry – the connection between wind power in Latvia and the number of lawyers in the United States. While this topic may initially appear as substantial as a breeze in a teacup, our comprehensive analysis revealed a surprising and robust relationship between these two seemingly unrelated entities. Through this study, we aim to shed light on this unusual correlation and challenge the traditional confines of research inquiry.
Wind power, a renewable energy source, has been gaining momentum globally, and Latvia has emerged as a notable player in this domain. On the other side of the globe, the United States boasts a significant legal community, with a substantial number of lawyers navigating the intricate web of statutes and regulations. At first glance, one might legitimately inquire – how could these two disparate domains possibly intersect?
Our research journey begins with an exploration of the windswept landscapes of Latvia, where the whirring blades of wind turbines harness the kinetic energy from the atmosphere, translating it into electricity. Meanwhile, in the legal corridors of the United States, lawyers navigate the complexities of the judicial system, hence, leading to intermittent gales of jokes and puns in legal proceedings.
As we delved deeper into the data, our endeavors uncovered a remarkable correlation between wind power generation in Latvia and the number of lawyers in the United States. While the causative link remains elusive like a breeze that slips through one's fingers, the statistical significance of this relationship left us intrigued and rattled our methodological foundations, much like a sudden squall at sea.
The aim of this paper is not merely to present an unconventional correlation, but to encourage researchers to embrace the unexpected and whimsical in their pursuit of knowledge. We hope that our findings inspire scholars to cast their analytical nets into uncharted waters, much like the capricious yet captivating breezes that traverse the Latvian landscape.
With this in mind, we embark on our journey to unveil the enigmatic connection between wind power in Latvia and the abundance of lawyers in the United States, aiming to provoke curiosity and a sense of adventure in the pursuit of scholarly endeavors.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The first gusts of inquiry into the enigmatic connection between wind power in Latvia and the abundance of lawyers in the United States, blow through the stolid edifice of traditional research methodologies. Smith et al. (2010) in "The Wind and the Law: Unraveling Mysteries" honed in on the atmospheric tumult in Latvia and the legal ebbs and flows in the US, deftly probing the interplay between these seemingly incongruous domains. Their earnest yet windswept narrative set the stage for our own whimsical odyssey.

Doe et al. (2015) in "Juries and Zephyrs: Legal Winds of Change" delved into the breezy realm of litigation and the tempestuous implications of wind power in the Baltic region, adding a gust of levity to the often somber discourse of legal academia. Their playful yet poignant insights carried over into our own endeavors, guiding us through the labyrinth of wind turbines and legal briefs with the finesse of a zephyr.

Jones and Smith (2018) in "Winds of Litigation: A Legal Bluster" ventured further into the legal terrain, unearthing the windswept nuances of attorney dynamics and courtroom dramatics. Their exploration of the legal whirlwinds impelled us to embrace the gales of curiosity and navigate the choppy waters of statistical analysis with equal measures of rigor and whimsy.

Additionally, we draw inspiration from non-fiction works such as "Wind Energy Explained" by J. F. Manwell and "Legal Eagles: Inside the World of Law" by A. B. Sisk, which offer insightful perspectives on wind power and the legal profession, respectively. These works provide a steady breeze of knowledge, guiding our scholarly sails through the turbulent seas of interdisciplinary inquiry.

Turning to the world of fiction, we find stirrings of relevance in books such as "The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle" by Haruki Murakami and "To Kill a Mockingbird" by Harper Lee. While these works may seem tangential, their gusty undertones and legal motifs evoke a sense of whimsy that resonates with our own lighthearted exploration of wind power and legal practice.

In the spirit of embracing the unexpected, we also take inspiration from board games such as "Winds of Fortune" and "Lawyer's Gambit," where chance and strategy intertwine like gusts of fate in a legal tumult. These games, while not directly related to our research, serve as playful reminders of the capricious nature of inquiry and the allure of whimsical exploration.

As we harness the narrative breezes of research inquiry, we embark on our playful yet purposeful quest to unravel the puzzling connection between wind power in Latvia and the abundance of lawyers in the United States. Through the whimsical lens of statistical analysis and scholarly mirth, we invite fellow researchers to join us in the spirited pursuit of knowledge, and perhaps encounter a few unexpected gusts along the way.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft the methodology section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Wind power generated in Latvia and Number of Lawyers in the United States. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Energy Information Administration and ABA . You used data from 1996 to 2021

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]]
Windy Whims: Weaving Wind Power in Latvia with the Lawyers' Load in the US

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research article delves into the unexpected and seemingly improbable link between wind power generated in Latvia and the number of lawyers in the United States. Utilizing data from the Energy Information Administration and the American Bar Association, we sought to unravel this whimsical correlation. Through rigorous statistical analysis, we found a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9523915 and a p-value less than 0.01 for the period of 1996 to 2021, suggesting a remarkably strong relationship between these seemingly disparate variables. While causation cannot be inferred from our findings, the conspicuous connection between wind power in Latvia and the abundance of lawyers in the US beckons for further investigation. We hope that this lighthearted yet insightful study sparks intrigue and encourages researchers to embrace the unexpected in their pursuit of knowledge.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
As the old saying goes, "the winds of change are blowing," and in the realm of research, some unexpected gusts have led us to a rather peculiar inquiry – the connection between wind power in Latvia and the number of lawyers in the United States. While this topic may initially appear as substantial as a breeze in a teacup, our comprehensive analysis revealed a surprising and robust relationship between these two seemingly unrelated entities. Through this study, we aim to shed light on this unusual correlation and challenge the traditional confines of research inquiry.
Wind power, a renewable energy source, has been gaining momentum globally, and Latvia has emerged as a notable player in this domain. On the other side of the globe, the United States boasts a significant legal community, with a substantial number of lawyers navigating the intricate web of statutes and regulations. At first glance, one might legitimately inquire – how could these two disparate domains possibly intersect?
Our research journey begins with an exploration of the windswept landscapes of Latvia, where the whirring blades of wind turbines harness the kinetic energy from the atmosphere, translating it into electricity. Meanwhile, in the legal corridors of the United States, lawyers navigate the complexities of the judicial system, hence, leading to intermittent gales of jokes and puns in legal proceedings.
As we delved deeper into the data, our endeavors uncovered a remarkable correlation between wind power generation in Latvia and the number of lawyers in the United States. While the causative link remains elusive like a breeze that slips through one's fingers, the statistical significance of this relationship left us intrigued and rattled our methodological foundations, much like a sudden squall at sea.
The aim of this paper is not merely to present an unconventional correlation, but to encourage researchers to embrace the unexpected and whimsical in their pursuit of knowledge. We hope that our findings inspire scholars to cast their analytical nets into uncharted waters, much like the capricious yet captivating breezes that traverse the Latvian landscape.
With this in mind, we embark on our journey to unveil the enigmatic connection between wind power in Latvia and the abundance of lawyers in the United States, aiming to provoke curiosity and a sense of adventure in the pursuit of scholarly endeavors.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To embark on our wind-swept journey of uncovering the correlation between wind power in Latvia and the number of lawyers in the United States, we employed a comprehensive and rigorous methodological approach. Our team embarked on a proverbial treasure hunt across the vast expanse of the internet, scavenging for data like intrepid adventurers seeking buried gold.

Data pertaining to wind power generation in Latvia was sourced from the Energy Information Administration, which provided a gusty overview of the country’s wind energy production from 1996 to 2021. Meanwhile, information pertaining to the number of lawyers in the United States was procured from the venerable American Bar Association, serving as the cornerstone for our investigation into the legal legions of the land.

With the aid of robust statistical software and a compass (metaphorically speaking), we subjected the collected data to a diverse array of analytical techniques. This included the calculation of correlation coefficients, p-values, and regressions, akin to unraveling the intricate patterns of the wind as it dances across the plains of Latvia and the legal labyrinths of the United States.

Our efforts culminated in the unearthing of a strikingly high correlation coefficient of 0.9523915, coupled with a p-value less than 0.01, suggesting a whirlwind of a relationship between wind power in Latvia and the abundance of lawyers in the United States. Through the statistical lens, our findings emerged like a tempest, leaving us astounded by the remarkable strength of this seemingly whimsical association.

While the exact mechanisms underlying this correlation remain as enigmatic as deciphering a cryptic breeze, our methodological approach stood staunch like a steadfast wind turbine in the face of this gusty puzzle. The winds of statistical analysis carried us through the buffeting gales of uncertainty, guiding us towards the illumination of this unforeseen and captivating link.

In conclusion, our methodology, albeit whimsical in its subject matter, adhered to the guiding principles of robust statistical analysis and rigorous data collection. Our ardent hope is that this methodological saga ignites the flames of curiosity and propels future researchers into the adventurous realm of unconventional correlations, much like a zephyr propelling a sailboat across uncharted waters.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft the results section of an academic research paper. You speak in the past tense (you found...).
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Wind power generated in Latvia and Number of Lawyers in the United States. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

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

For the time period 1996 to 2021, you found a correlation 0.9523915, r-squared of 0.9070496, 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]]
Windy Whims: Weaving Wind Power in Latvia with the Lawyers' Load in the US

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research article delves into the unexpected and seemingly improbable link between wind power generated in Latvia and the number of lawyers in the United States. Utilizing data from the Energy Information Administration and the American Bar Association, we sought to unravel this whimsical correlation. Through rigorous statistical analysis, we found a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9523915 and a p-value less than 0.01 for the period of 1996 to 2021, suggesting a remarkably strong relationship between these seemingly disparate variables. While causation cannot be inferred from our findings, the conspicuous connection between wind power in Latvia and the abundance of lawyers in the US beckons for further investigation. We hope that this lighthearted yet insightful study sparks intrigue and encourages researchers to embrace the unexpected in their pursuit of knowledge.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
As the old saying goes, "the winds of change are blowing," and in the realm of research, some unexpected gusts have led us to a rather peculiar inquiry – the connection between wind power in Latvia and the number of lawyers in the United States. While this topic may initially appear as substantial as a breeze in a teacup, our comprehensive analysis revealed a surprising and robust relationship between these two seemingly unrelated entities. Through this study, we aim to shed light on this unusual correlation and challenge the traditional confines of research inquiry.
Wind power, a renewable energy source, has been gaining momentum globally, and Latvia has emerged as a notable player in this domain. On the other side of the globe, the United States boasts a significant legal community, with a substantial number of lawyers navigating the intricate web of statutes and regulations. At first glance, one might legitimately inquire – how could these two disparate domains possibly intersect?
Our research journey begins with an exploration of the windswept landscapes of Latvia, where the whirring blades of wind turbines harness the kinetic energy from the atmosphere, translating it into electricity. Meanwhile, in the legal corridors of the United States, lawyers navigate the complexities of the judicial system, hence, leading to intermittent gales of jokes and puns in legal proceedings.
As we delved deeper into the data, our endeavors uncovered a remarkable correlation between wind power generation in Latvia and the number of lawyers in the United States. While the causative link remains elusive like a breeze that slips through one's fingers, the statistical significance of this relationship left us intrigued and rattled our methodological foundations, much like a sudden squall at sea.
The aim of this paper is not merely to present an unconventional correlation, but to encourage researchers to embrace the unexpected and whimsical in their pursuit of knowledge. We hope that our findings inspire scholars to cast their analytical nets into uncharted waters, much like the capricious yet captivating breezes that traverse the Latvian landscape.
With this in mind, we embark on our journey to unveil the enigmatic connection between wind power in Latvia and the abundance of lawyers in the United States, aiming to provoke curiosity and a sense of adventure in the pursuit of scholarly endeavors.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

In our examination of the relationship between wind power generated in Latvia and the number of lawyers in the United States, we uncovered a correlation coefficient of 0.9523915, denoting a remarkably robust association between these seemingly unrelated variables. This finding far surpasses the mere "gentle breeze" of correlation and instead resembles a full-blown gust of statistical significance.

The r-squared value of 0.9070496 further emphasizes the strength of the relationship, indicating that a significant proportion of the variance in the number of lawyers in the US can be explained by the variation in wind power production in Latvia. It seems that the winds of statistical destiny were blowing in our favor during this investigation.

Additionally, with a p-value of less than 0.01, we can confidently reject the null hypothesis and affirm that the observed association is highly unlikely to have occurred by random chance alone. This result is as clear and impactful as a gust of wind on a tranquil summer's day.

To visually portray the strength of this correlation, we present Figure 1, a scatterplot that vividly illustrates the striking relationship between wind power generation in Latvia and the number of lawyers in the United States. This figure serves as a tangible demonstration of the robustness of our findings and serves as a beacon urging researchers to unravel the mystery behind this unexpected relationship.

These findings not only challenge conventional wisdom but also invite further exploration into the whimsical world of wind power and legal demographics. While we cannot assert causation based solely on our correlation analysis, we hope that our results ignite a sense of curiosity and prompt scholars to embrace the unconventional in their pursuit of knowledge.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft the discussion section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Wind power generated in Latvia and Number of Lawyers in the United States. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Limit your response to 500 tokens.

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

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

[[TITLE]]
Windy Whims: Weaving Wind Power in Latvia with the Lawyers' Load in the US

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research article delves into the unexpected and seemingly improbable link between wind power generated in Latvia and the number of lawyers in the United States. Utilizing data from the Energy Information Administration and the American Bar Association, we sought to unravel this whimsical correlation. Through rigorous statistical analysis, we found a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9523915 and a p-value less than 0.01 for the period of 1996 to 2021, suggesting a remarkably strong relationship between these seemingly disparate variables. While causation cannot be inferred from our findings, the conspicuous connection between wind power in Latvia and the abundance of lawyers in the US beckons for further investigation. We hope that this lighthearted yet insightful study sparks intrigue and encourages researchers to embrace the unexpected in their pursuit of knowledge.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The first gusts of inquiry into the enigmatic connection between wind power in Latvia and the abundance of lawyers in the United States, blow through the stolid edifice of traditional research methodologies. Smith et al. (2010) in "The Wind and the Law: Unraveling Mysteries" honed in on the atmospheric tumult in Latvia and the legal ebbs and flows in the US, deftly probing the interplay between these seemingly incongruous domains. Their earnest yet windswept narrative set the stage for our own whimsical odyssey.
Doe et al. (2015) in "Juries and Zephyrs: Legal Winds of Change" delved into the breezy realm of litigation and the tempestuous implications of wind power in the Baltic region, adding a gust of levity to the often somber discourse of legal academia. Their playful yet poignant insights carried over into our own endeavors, guiding us through the labyrinth of wind turbines and legal briefs with the finesse of a zephyr.
Jones and Smith (2018) in "Winds of Litigation: A Legal Bluster" ventured further into the legal terrain, unearthing the windswept nuances of attorney dynamics and courtroom dramatics. Their exploration of the legal whirlwinds impelled us to embrace the gales of curiosity and navigate the choppy waters of statistical analysis with equal measures of rigor and whimsy.
Additionally, we draw inspiration from non-fiction works such as "Wind Energy Explained" by J. F. Manwell and "Legal Eagles: Inside the World of Law" by A. B. Sisk, which offer insightful perspectives on wind power and the legal profession, respectively. These works provide a steady breeze of knowledge, guiding our scholarly sails through the turbulent seas of interdisciplinary inquiry.
Turning to the world of fiction, we find stirrings of relevance in books such as "The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle" by Haruki Murakami and "To Kill a Mockingbird" by Harper Lee. While these works may seem tangential, their gusty undertones and legal motifs evoke a sense of whimsy that resonates with our own lighthearted exploration of wind power and legal practice.
In the spirit of embracing the unexpected, we also take inspiration from board games such as "Winds of Fortune" and "Lawyer's Gambit," where chance and strategy intertwine like gusts of fate in a legal tumult. These games, while not directly related to our research, serve as playful reminders of the capricious nature of inquiry and the allure of whimsical exploration.
As we harness the narrative breezes of research inquiry, we embark on our playful yet purposeful quest to unravel the puzzling connection between wind power in Latvia and the abundance of lawyers in the United States. Through the whimsical lens of statistical analysis and scholarly mirth, we invite fellow researchers to join us in the spirited pursuit of knowledge, and perhaps encounter a few unexpected gusts along the way.

[[RESULTS]]
In our examination of the relationship between wind power generated in Latvia and the number of lawyers in the United States, we uncovered a correlation coefficient of 0.9523915, denoting a remarkably robust association between these seemingly unrelated variables. This finding far surpasses the mere "gentle breeze" of correlation and instead resembles a full-blown gust of statistical significance.
The r-squared value of 0.9070496 further emphasizes the strength of the relationship, indicating that a significant proportion of the variance in the number of lawyers in the US can be explained by the variation in wind power production in Latvia. It seems that the winds of statistical destiny were blowing in our favor during this investigation.
Additionally, with a p-value of less than 0.01, we can confidently reject the null hypothesis and affirm that the observed association is highly unlikely to have occurred by random chance alone. This result is as clear and impactful as a gust of wind on a tranquil summer's day.
To visually portray the strength of this correlation, we present Figure 1, a scatterplot that vividly illustrates the striking relationship between wind power generation in Latvia and the number of lawyers in the United States. This figure serves as a tangible demonstration of the robustness of our findings and serves as a beacon urging researchers to unravel the mystery behind this unexpected relationship.
These findings not only challenge conventional wisdom but also invite further exploration into the whimsical world of wind power and legal demographics. While we cannot assert causation based solely on our correlation analysis, we hope that our results ignite a sense of curiosity and prompt scholars to embrace the unconventional in their pursuit of knowledge.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The gusty findings of our investigation have blown open a new realm of inquiry into the whimsical connection between wind power in Latvia and the abundance of lawyers in the United States. While the notion of such a correlation may seem as outlandish as finding a legal brief fluttering in the Baltic breeze, our rigorous statistical analysis has revealed a remarkably robust and significant association between these seemingly disparate variables.

Our results echo the sentiments put forth by Smith et al. (2010) and Doe et al. (2015) who dared to delve into the windswept mysteries of this enigmatic relationship. With a correlation coefficient of 0.9523915, our findings not only corroborate but also amplify the breezy insights of prior research. The winds of statistical destiny seem to have conspired in our favor, allowing us to capture the tempestuous essence of this unexpected correlation.

The r-squared value of 0.9070496 further bolsters the veracity of our findings, illustrating that a substantial proportion of the variation in the number of lawyers in the US can be elucidated by the undulating undulations of wind power production in Latvia. This robust explanatory power reinforces the notion that there is more than just a passing zephyr of association between these two variables.

In line with the playful yet purposeful spirit of our research, the p-value of less than 0.01 provides a resounding affirmation of the remarkable unlikelihood of this correlation occurring by mere random chance. The statistical winds seem to carry a definitive whisper of significance, urging scholars to take a deep breath and delve into the breezy labyrinth of unwinding this unexpected relationship.

Figure 1 stands as a striking visual testament to the potent connection we have uncovered, akin to a vivid portrayal of a legal brief weaving its way through the gusty realms of the Baltic countryside. This tangible representation serves as a beacon, guiding fellow researchers to set sail into the zephyrous world of wind power and legal demographics, and perhaps encountering a few unexpected gusts of insight along the way.

In the face of these robust findings, we are compelled to heed the whimsical call of further exploration, beckoning scholars to embrace the capricious nature of this linkage and chart a course for uncovering the underlying nuances of this unexpected correlation. As we bask in the windswept glow of statistical significance, we invite fellow researchers to join us on this lighthearted yet insightful odyssey into the interconnected realms of wind power and lawyer demographics.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft the discussion section of goofy academic research papers that sounds like it belongs based on the title and abstract provided.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Wind power generated in Latvia and Number of Lawyers in the United States. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

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

Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
Windy Whims: Weaving Wind Power in Latvia with the Lawyers' Load in the US

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research article delves into the unexpected and seemingly improbable link between wind power generated in Latvia and the number of lawyers in the United States. Utilizing data from the Energy Information Administration and the American Bar Association, we sought to unravel this whimsical correlation. Through rigorous statistical analysis, we found a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9523915 and a p-value less than 0.01 for the period of 1996 to 2021, suggesting a remarkably strong relationship between these seemingly disparate variables. While causation cannot be inferred from our findings, the conspicuous connection between wind power in Latvia and the abundance of lawyers in the US beckons for further investigation. We hope that this lighthearted yet insightful study sparks intrigue and encourages researchers to embrace the unexpected in their pursuit of knowledge.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
As the old saying goes, "the winds of change are blowing," and in the realm of research, some unexpected gusts have led us to a rather peculiar inquiry – the connection between wind power in Latvia and the number of lawyers in the United States. While this topic may initially appear as substantial as a breeze in a teacup, our comprehensive analysis revealed a surprising and robust relationship between these two seemingly unrelated entities. Through this study, we aim to shed light on this unusual correlation and challenge the traditional confines of research inquiry.
Wind power, a renewable energy source, has been gaining momentum globally, and Latvia has emerged as a notable player in this domain. On the other side of the globe, the United States boasts a significant legal community, with a substantial number of lawyers navigating the intricate web of statutes and regulations. At first glance, one might legitimately inquire – how could these two disparate domains possibly intersect?
Our research journey begins with an exploration of the windswept landscapes of Latvia, where the whirring blades of wind turbines harness the kinetic energy from the atmosphere, translating it into electricity. Meanwhile, in the legal corridors of the United States, lawyers navigate the complexities of the judicial system, hence, leading to intermittent gales of jokes and puns in legal proceedings.
As we delved deeper into the data, our endeavors uncovered a remarkable correlation between wind power generation in Latvia and the number of lawyers in the United States. While the causative link remains elusive like a breeze that slips through one's fingers, the statistical significance of this relationship left us intrigued and rattled our methodological foundations, much like a sudden squall at sea.
The aim of this paper is not merely to present an unconventional correlation, but to encourage researchers to embrace the unexpected and whimsical in their pursuit of knowledge. We hope that our findings inspire scholars to cast their analytical nets into uncharted waters, much like the capricious yet captivating breezes that traverse the Latvian landscape.
With this in mind, we embark on our journey to unveil the enigmatic connection between wind power in Latvia and the abundance of lawyers in the United States, aiming to provoke curiosity and a sense of adventure in the pursuit of scholarly endeavors.

[[RESULTS]]
In our examination of the relationship between wind power generated in Latvia and the number of lawyers in the United States, we uncovered a correlation coefficient of 0.9523915, denoting a remarkably robust association between these seemingly unrelated variables. This finding far surpasses the mere "gentle breeze" of correlation and instead resembles a full-blown gust of statistical significance.
The r-squared value of 0.9070496 further emphasizes the strength of the relationship, indicating that a significant proportion of the variance in the number of lawyers in the US can be explained by the variation in wind power production in Latvia. It seems that the winds of statistical destiny were blowing in our favor during this investigation.
Additionally, with a p-value of less than 0.01, we can confidently reject the null hypothesis and affirm that the observed association is highly unlikely to have occurred by random chance alone. This result is as clear and impactful as a gust of wind on a tranquil summer's day.
To visually portray the strength of this correlation, we present Figure 1, a scatterplot that vividly illustrates the striking relationship between wind power generation in Latvia and the number of lawyers in the United States. This figure serves as a tangible demonstration of the robustness of our findings and serves as a beacon urging researchers to unravel the mystery behind this unexpected relationship.
These findings not only challenge conventional wisdom but also invite further exploration into the whimsical world of wind power and legal demographics. While we cannot assert causation based solely on our correlation analysis, we hope that our results ignite a sense of curiosity and prompt scholars to embrace the unconventional in their pursuit of knowledge.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our investigation into the seemingly whimsical relationship between wind power generated in Latvia and the number of lawyers in the United States has blown our expectations out of the water. The robust correlation coefficient of 0.9523915 and the r-squared value of 0.9070496 have left us feeling as pleasantly surprised as a gentle gust of wind on a warm summer's day. Our findings not only challenge traditional research boundaries but also provide a breath of fresh air in the world of statistical analysis.

While it would be a breeze to dismiss this correlation as mere happenstance, the p-value of less than 0.01 dismisses such notions as quickly as a strong gust dispersing a pile of leaves. Our results indicate that the relationship between wind power in Latvia and the abundance of lawyers in the US is as clear and tangible as the breeze that rustles through the Latvian countryside.

As we tie up this paper with a neat bow, we must acknowledge that our research has raised more questions than it has answered. The wind of inquiry continues to blow, leaving the enigmatic link between wind power and lawyer demographics fluttering in the breeze of scholarly intrigue. Nonetheless, after sailing through the turbulent waters of statistical analysis, we can confidently assert that no further research is needed in this delightfully peculiar area. It seems that our work here is as satisfyingly complete as the calm after a blustery storm.


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 Windy Whims: Weaving Wind Power in Latvia with the Lawyers' Load in the US. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

Journal of Renewable Energy Law and Policy


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 Windy Whims: Weaving Wind Power in Latvia with the Lawyers' Load in the US. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The International Society for Zephyr Studies


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 Windy Whims: Weaving Wind Power in Latvia with the Lawyers' Load in the US with an abstract of This research article delves into the unexpected and seemingly improbable link between wind power generated in Latvia and the number of lawyers in the United States. Utilizing data from the Energy Information Administration and the American Bar Association, we sought to unravel this whimsical correlation. Through rigorous statistical analysis, we found a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9523915 and a p-value less than 0.01 for the period of 1996 to 2021, suggesting a remarkably strong relationship between these seemingly disparate variables. While causation cannot be inferred from our findings, the conspicuous connection between wind power in Latvia and the abundance of lawyers in the US beckons for further investigation. We hope that this lighthearted yet insightful study sparks intrigue and encourages researchers to embrace the unexpected in their pursuit of knowledge.

ChatGPT:

wind power, Latvia, lawyers, United States, correlation, statistical analysis, Energy Information Administration, American Bar Association, causation, research, investigation, whimsical, correlation coefficient, p-value

*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

Wind power generated in Latvia
Detailed data title: Total wind power generated in Latvia in billion kWh
Source: Energy Information Administration
See what else correlates with Wind power generated in Latvia

Number of Lawyers in the United States
Detailed data title: The Count of ABA Lawyers in the United States
Source: ABA
See what else correlates with Number of Lawyers in the United States

Correlation r = 0.9523915 (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 = 0.9070496 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 90.7% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Number of Lawyers in the United States) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Wind power generated in Latvia) over the 26 years from 1996 through 2021.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 7.01E-14. 0.0000000000000701157827791305
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 0.95 in 7.01E-12% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 14,262,124,166,111 random variables You don't actually need 14 trillion 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 25 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 25 because we have two variables measured over a period of 26 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.

[ 0.9, 0.98 ] 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.
19961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172018201920202021
Wind power generated in Latvia (Billion kWh)0.0010.0020.0020.0020.0040.0030.0110.0480.0490.0470.0460.0530.0590.050.0487030.070070.1130930.118890.1380.145570.1267610.1485220.120840.152490.1750840.137282
Number of Lawyers in the United States (Lawyers)95326095326098592110004401022460104890010497501058660108450011047701116970114336011621201180390120310012254501245200126801012814301300700131287013359601342380135208013287401327910




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([0.001,0.002,0.002,0.002,0.004,0.003,0.011,0.048,0.049,0.047,0.046,0.053,0.059,0.05,0.048703,0.07007,0.113093,0.11889,0.138,0.14557,0.126761,0.148522,0.12084,0.15249,0.175084,0.137282,])
array_2 = np.array([953260,953260,985921,1000440,1022460,1048900,1049750,1058660,1084500,1104770,1116970,1143360,1162120,1180390,1203100,1225450,1245200,1268010,1281430,1300700,1312870,1335960,1342380,1352080,1328740,1327910,])
array_1_name = "Wind power generated in Latvia"
array_2_name = "Number of Lawyers in the United States"

# 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 rating is much appreciated!


Correlation ID: 2710 · Black Variable ID: 23783 · Red Variable ID: 542
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0