about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #2,767 · View random

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

AI explanation

The cleaner air in Fort Wayne led to a decrease in the production of anti-air pollution technology. This technology was actually being shipped to Norway, but as air quality improved in Fort Wayne, there was less of a market for the devices in the US, leading to a surplus. To clear out this surplus, the manufacturers decided to switch to producing kerosene lamps instead, leading to a decrease in the demand for kerosene in Norway. It's an unexpected domino effect of clean air leading to a dimmer situation in Norway!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Create an image of the Fort Wayne skyline with visibly reduced emissions from factories and cars. The air should appear cleaner and fresher, with a sense of clarity and openness. Show kerosene molecules originating from Norway and drifting across the Atlantic Ocean toward Fort Wayne, influenced by the improved air quality. The scene should capture the serenity and revitalization of the environment, emphasizing the contrast between the cleaner atmosphere and the arrival of the kerosene molecules. 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: Air pollution in Fort Wayne and Kerosene used in Norway. Given these, which of the following image style descriptions seems most appropriate? Pick the one that seems to be related to one of the variables at hand. Please respond with only one of the following potential descriptions: Celtic art A scene from Skyrim Photorealism a meme Concept art
ChatGPT: A scene from Skyrim

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 Air pollution in Fort Wayne and Kerosene used in Norway, in the following situation: Because as air pollution decreased in Fort Wayne, the cleaner air created a powerful vacuum effect, pulling kerosene molecules from Norway across the Atlantic Ocean. This led to a decrease in kerosene used in Norway, as the molecules decided to settle in Fort Wayne for the fresher air and a change of scenery.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In Fort Wayne, the skyline is clear with fewer emissions from factories and cars, and the air looks cleaner and fresher. Across the Atlantic Ocean, kerosene molecules from Norway are seen making their way towards Fort Wayne, drawn by the improved air quality.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You write and improve image generation prompts for DALLE-3. You maintain the same subjects, but enhance the visuals.
User prompt: Please respond with an image generation prompt that would be likely to create an interesting visual using DALLE-3, using the following style: [ A scene from Skyrim ] and depicting this scene: In Fort Wayne, the skyline is clear with fewer emissions from factories and cars, and the air looks cleaner and fresher. Across the Atlantic Ocean, kerosene molecules from Norway are seen making their way towards Fort Wayne, drawn by the improved air quality. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Create an image of the Fort Wayne skyline with visibly reduced emissions from factories and cars. The air should appear cleaner and fresher, with a sense of clarity and openness. Show kerosene molecules originating from Norway and drifting across the Atlantic Ocean toward Fort Wayne, influenced by the improved air quality. The scene should capture the serenity and revitalization of the environment, emphasizing the contrast between the cleaner atmosphere and the arrival of the kerosene molecules.

*Variations in the User Prompts from chart to chart are just the result of random number generation in Python. I wrote a few arrays of various styles and methods to ask questions to change up the results. Every time this site writes an explanation or generates an image, the script picks from each at random.

I sequence the requests into multiple prompts because I find GPT 3.5 to perform much better with short, well-managed contexts. Thus, I track the context directly in Python and only ask ChatGPT targeted questions.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 (fine-tuned)
System prompt: You provide humorous responses in the form of plausible sounding explanations for correlations. You assume the correlation is causative for the purpose of the explanation even if it is ridiculous. You do not chat with the user, you only reply with the causal connection explanation and nothing else.
User prompt: Please make up a funny explanation for how a decrease in Air pollution in Fort Wayne caused Kerosene used in Norway to decrease.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Up in Smoke: The Curious Connection Between Air Pollution in Fort Wayne and Kerosene Consumption in Norway

Journal of Ecological Quirkiness

Jan 2024

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




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

Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air pollution in Fort Wayne and Kerosene used in Norway. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Make the title seem clever.

Your research team used data from Environmental Protection Agency and Energy Information Administration to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.7206808 and p < 0.01 for 1980 to 2022.

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

[[TITLE]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit

[[ABSTRACT]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit



ChatGPT:
[[TITLE]]
"Up in Smoke: The Curious Connection Between Air Pollution in Fort Wayne and Kerosene Consumption in Norway"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper presents a comprehensive analysis of the intriguing link between air pollution levels in Fort Wayne and kerosene usage in Norway. Drawing on data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Information Administration, our research team extensively examined the correlation between these seemingly disconnected variables. Surprisingly, a correlation coefficient of 0.7206808 and p < 0.01 was observed for the period spanning from 1980 to 2022. The implications of this unexpected relationship, while still shrouded in mystery, certainly illuminate the importance of considering global interconnectivity and combustion-related influences. These findings serve as a reminder that sometimes, when it comes to environmental impacts, the answers may be hidden in the most unassuming places - perhaps even up in smoke.


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

Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air pollution in Fort Wayne and Kerosene used in Norway. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Up in Smoke: The Curious Connection Between Air Pollution in Fort Wayne and Kerosene Consumption in Norway"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper presents a comprehensive analysis of the intriguing link between air pollution levels in Fort Wayne and kerosene usage in Norway. Drawing on data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Information Administration, our research team extensively examined the correlation between these seemingly disconnected variables. Surprisingly, a correlation coefficient of 0.7206808 and p < 0.01 was observed for the period spanning from 1980 to 2022. The implications of this unexpected relationship, while still shrouded in mystery, certainly illuminate the importance of considering global interconnectivity and combustion-related influences. These findings serve as a reminder that sometimes, when it comes to environmental impacts, the answers may be hidden in the most unassuming places - perhaps even up in smoke.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
Introduction

As the old adage goes, "Where there's smoke, there's fire." In the case of our research, we might amend that to say, "Where there's smoke, there's statistically significant data and a perplexing correlation." In this study, we set out to unravel the enigmatic connection between air pollution in Fort Wayne and kerosene consumption in Norway. While on the surface, these two variables may seem as compatible as oil and water, our findings present a compelling case for their unexpected relationship.

The field of environmental research often beckons us to venture into uncharted territory, to explore the unexplored, and to chase after correlations that might seem as elusive as a rare bird. In this case, our pursuit led us to examine a connection that might be likened to chasing shadows - an endeavor that necessitated an open mind and a willingness to embrace the unexpected, the unusual, and the downright perplexing. As we delved into the data, hoping to shed light on the murky waters of global environmental impacts, we found ourselves tangled in a web of statistics, variables, and results that, to put it bluntly, left us quite literally breathless.

With the advent of statistical software and an abundance of data at our disposal, we set about analyzing the relationship between air pollution levels in Fort Wayne and kerosene consumption in Norway. Little did we anticipate the twists and turns that awaited us in this investigation. The statistical methods we employed brought to mind a game of connect-the-dots, with each data point serving as a little flag in the ground guiding us through the maze of our findings. And, like any good mystery novel, the clues we uncovered led us down unexpected paths, unraveled hidden truths, and pointed towards a correlation that, to put it mildly, turned our hypotheses upside down.

So, reader, and fellow aficionado of the scientific pursuit, let us embark on this journey of exploration, where the seemingly unconnected converge and where the mysterious correlation between air pollution in Fort Wayne and kerosene consumption in Norway takes center stage. It's a story of unexpected connections, statistical revelations, and, much like a good joke, a punchline that leaves us pondering the enigmatic ways of this world.


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

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air pollution in Fort Wayne and Kerosene used in Norway. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

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

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

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Up in Smoke: The Curious Connection Between Air Pollution in Fort Wayne and Kerosene Consumption in Norway"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper presents a comprehensive analysis of the intriguing link between air pollution levels in Fort Wayne and kerosene usage in Norway. Drawing on data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Information Administration, our research team extensively examined the correlation between these seemingly disconnected variables. Surprisingly, a correlation coefficient of 0.7206808 and p < 0.01 was observed for the period spanning from 1980 to 2022. The implications of this unexpected relationship, while still shrouded in mystery, certainly illuminate the importance of considering global interconnectivity and combustion-related influences. These findings serve as a reminder that sometimes, when it comes to environmental impacts, the answers may be hidden in the most unassuming places - perhaps even up in smoke.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
Introduction
As the old adage goes, "Where there's smoke, there's fire." In the case of our research, we might amend that to say, "Where there's smoke, there's statistically significant data and a perplexing correlation." In this study, we set out to unravel the enigmatic connection between air pollution in Fort Wayne and kerosene consumption in Norway. While on the surface, these two variables may seem as compatible as oil and water, our findings present a compelling case for their unexpected relationship.
The field of environmental research often beckons us to venture into uncharted territory, to explore the unexplored, and to chase after correlations that might seem as elusive as a rare bird. In this case, our pursuit led us to examine a connection that might be likened to chasing shadows - an endeavor that necessitated an open mind and a willingness to embrace the unexpected, the unusual, and the downright perplexing. As we delved into the data, hoping to shed light on the murky waters of global environmental impacts, we found ourselves tangled in a web of statistics, variables, and results that, to put it bluntly, left us quite literally breathless.
With the advent of statistical software and an abundance of data at our disposal, we set about analyzing the relationship between air pollution levels in Fort Wayne and kerosene consumption in Norway. Little did we anticipate the twists and turns that awaited us in this investigation. The statistical methods we employed brought to mind a game of connect-the-dots, with each data point serving as a little flag in the ground guiding us through the maze of our findings. And, like any good mystery novel, the clues we uncovered led us down unexpected paths, unraveled hidden truths, and pointed towards a correlation that, to put it mildly, turned our hypotheses upside down.
So, reader, and fellow aficionado of the scientific pursuit, let us embark on this journey of exploration, where the seemingly unconnected converge and where the mysterious correlation between air pollution in Fort Wayne and kerosene consumption in Norway takes center stage. It's a story of unexpected connections, statistical revelations, and, much like a good joke, a punchline that leaves us pondering the enigmatic ways of this world.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

In their seminal work, Smith et al. (2015) delve into the intricate web of air pollution dynamics in urban environments, providing a comprehensive overview of the factors contributing to particulate matter emissions. Similarly, Doe and Jones (2018) present a thorough examination of kerosene consumption patterns in Scandinavian countries, shedding light on the socio-economic influences that drive energy choices in these regions. These foundational studies paved the way for our investigation into the perplexing link between air pollution levels in Fort Wayne and kerosene usage in Norway.

Drawing inspiration from non-fiction literature, our research delved into works such as "The Air We Breathe" by Dr. Clean Lungs and "Fueling the Future: A Cultural Analysis of Energy Sources" by Professor Heat Power. These texts provided valuable insights into the complex interplay of environmental factors and energy consumption patterns, guiding our inquiry into the unexpected relationship between seemingly disparate variables.

As we expanded our literary repertoire to include fiction works that bore tangential relevance to our study, we found ourselves musing over titles like "Smoke Signals" by Ember Sparks and "The Kerosene Chronicles" by Ignatius Ignition. While these novels may not directly expound on the empirical data we sought, their evocative themes of elemental influence and mysterious interconnections struck a chord with our exploratory mindset.

In a playful nod to unconventional sources of inspiration, we also found resonance with board games such as "Smog Over Scandinavia" and "Kerosene Quest," which, while lighthearted in nature, prompted us to contemplate the intricate dance of environmental forces and human behaviors that underpin our research.

The amalgamation of scholarly works, fictional narratives, and playful diversions laid the foundation for our investigation into the confounding nexus between air pollution in Fort Wayne and kerosene consumption in Norway. It is within this eclectic blend of influences that we embarked on our quest for knowledge, ready to uncover correlations in unexpected places and perhaps stumble upon a comedic twist in the tale of environmental interconnectedness.


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

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air pollution in Fort Wayne and Kerosene used in Norway. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. 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 Environmental Protection Agency and Energy Information Administration . You used data from 1980 to 2022

Make up the research methods you don't know. Make them a bit goofy and convoluted.

Here is the title, abstract, and introduction of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Up in Smoke: The Curious Connection Between Air Pollution in Fort Wayne and Kerosene Consumption in Norway"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper presents a comprehensive analysis of the intriguing link between air pollution levels in Fort Wayne and kerosene usage in Norway. Drawing on data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Information Administration, our research team extensively examined the correlation between these seemingly disconnected variables. Surprisingly, a correlation coefficient of 0.7206808 and p < 0.01 was observed for the period spanning from 1980 to 2022. The implications of this unexpected relationship, while still shrouded in mystery, certainly illuminate the importance of considering global interconnectivity and combustion-related influences. These findings serve as a reminder that sometimes, when it comes to environmental impacts, the answers may be hidden in the most unassuming places - perhaps even up in smoke.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
Introduction
As the old adage goes, "Where there's smoke, there's fire." In the case of our research, we might amend that to say, "Where there's smoke, there's statistically significant data and a perplexing correlation." In this study, we set out to unravel the enigmatic connection between air pollution in Fort Wayne and kerosene consumption in Norway. While on the surface, these two variables may seem as compatible as oil and water, our findings present a compelling case for their unexpected relationship.
The field of environmental research often beckons us to venture into uncharted territory, to explore the unexplored, and to chase after correlations that might seem as elusive as a rare bird. In this case, our pursuit led us to examine a connection that might be likened to chasing shadows - an endeavor that necessitated an open mind and a willingness to embrace the unexpected, the unusual, and the downright perplexing. As we delved into the data, hoping to shed light on the murky waters of global environmental impacts, we found ourselves tangled in a web of statistics, variables, and results that, to put it bluntly, left us quite literally breathless.
With the advent of statistical software and an abundance of data at our disposal, we set about analyzing the relationship between air pollution levels in Fort Wayne and kerosene consumption in Norway. Little did we anticipate the twists and turns that awaited us in this investigation. The statistical methods we employed brought to mind a game of connect-the-dots, with each data point serving as a little flag in the ground guiding us through the maze of our findings. And, like any good mystery novel, the clues we uncovered led us down unexpected paths, unraveled hidden truths, and pointed towards a correlation that, to put it mildly, turned our hypotheses upside down.
So, reader, and fellow aficionado of the scientific pursuit, let us embark on this journey of exploration, where the seemingly unconnected converge and where the mysterious correlation between air pollution in Fort Wayne and kerosene consumption in Norway takes center stage. It's a story of unexpected connections, statistical revelations, and, much like a good joke, a punchline that leaves us pondering the enigmatic ways of this world.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

Data Collection:
The data for this study was collected from a variety of sources, with a special nod to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Energy Information Administration (EIA). These titans of data provision graciously offered up their treasure troves of information, and like archeologists sifting through ancient ruins, we meticulously sorted through the data from 1980 to 2022, diligently extracting every tidbit of information related to air pollution in Fort Wayne and kerosene consumption in Norway. We then carefully polished each data point, much like a diamond in the rough, ensuring that our final analysis was based on the most sparkling and reliable information available.

Statistical Analysis:
Armed with our trusty statistical software and an arsenal of caffeine for those late-night number crunching sessions, we embarked on the daunting task of unraveling the mystery of the correlation between air pollution in Fort Wayne and kerosene consumption in Norway. Our statistical approach was as carefully crafted as a complex chemical equation, with regression analysis, correlation coefficients, and p-values forming the building blocks of our methodology. This process was not without its twists and turns, like a rollercoaster ride through the peaks and valleys of statistical significance, but we emerged victorious, wielding our significant correlation coefficient of 0.7206808 and p < 0.01 like a badge of honor.

Variables and Controls:
In order to navigate the labyrinth of variables and controls, we employed a systematic approach akin to a detective investigating a perplexing case. We carefully considered potential confounding factors, such as socioeconomic trends, legislative interventions, and even the weather patterns in both Fort Wayne and Norway. With our Sherlock Holmes hats firmly in place, we meticulously combed through the data, separating the signal from the noise, and ensuring that our analysis was as robust and resilient as a timeworn Viking ship sailing through the stormy seas of statistical inference.

Limitations:
No research endeavor would be complete without acknowledging its limitations, and in this regard, our study is no exception. Despite our best efforts, there may still be uncharted territories in the realm of environmental interconnectivity that have eluded our analysis. The complexity of global environmental influences is as vast and intricate as the cosmic dance of particles in a quantum physics experiment, and we humbly recognize that our study represents but a single brushstroke in the grand masterpiece of scientific inquiry.

Ethical Considerations:
Our research was conducted with the utmost respect for ethical standards, ensuring the confidentiality and privacy of the data sources utilized. We also made a conscious effort to minimize our own carbon footprint during the research process, opting for virtual meetings, electronic document submission, and energy-efficient computing practices whenever possible. After all, it would be quite ironic to study the impacts of combustion-related influences while leaving a trail of environmental havoc in our own wake.

In conclusion, our methodology was a careful blend of scientific rigor, statistical prowess, and a dash of good humor – because when it comes to navigating the murky waters of research, a lighthearted approach can be just as essential as a well-constructed hypothesis.


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

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air pollution in Fort Wayne and Kerosene used in Norway. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. 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 Environmental Protection Agency and Energy Information Administration .

For the time period 1980 to 2022, you found a correlation 0.7206808, r-squared of 0.5193808, 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]]
"Up in Smoke: The Curious Connection Between Air Pollution in Fort Wayne and Kerosene Consumption in Norway"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper presents a comprehensive analysis of the intriguing link between air pollution levels in Fort Wayne and kerosene usage in Norway. Drawing on data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Information Administration, our research team extensively examined the correlation between these seemingly disconnected variables. Surprisingly, a correlation coefficient of 0.7206808 and p < 0.01 was observed for the period spanning from 1980 to 2022. The implications of this unexpected relationship, while still shrouded in mystery, certainly illuminate the importance of considering global interconnectivity and combustion-related influences. These findings serve as a reminder that sometimes, when it comes to environmental impacts, the answers may be hidden in the most unassuming places - perhaps even up in smoke.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
Introduction
As the old adage goes, "Where there's smoke, there's fire." In the case of our research, we might amend that to say, "Where there's smoke, there's statistically significant data and a perplexing correlation." In this study, we set out to unravel the enigmatic connection between air pollution in Fort Wayne and kerosene consumption in Norway. While on the surface, these two variables may seem as compatible as oil and water, our findings present a compelling case for their unexpected relationship.
The field of environmental research often beckons us to venture into uncharted territory, to explore the unexplored, and to chase after correlations that might seem as elusive as a rare bird. In this case, our pursuit led us to examine a connection that might be likened to chasing shadows - an endeavor that necessitated an open mind and a willingness to embrace the unexpected, the unusual, and the downright perplexing. As we delved into the data, hoping to shed light on the murky waters of global environmental impacts, we found ourselves tangled in a web of statistics, variables, and results that, to put it bluntly, left us quite literally breathless.
With the advent of statistical software and an abundance of data at our disposal, we set about analyzing the relationship between air pollution levels in Fort Wayne and kerosene consumption in Norway. Little did we anticipate the twists and turns that awaited us in this investigation. The statistical methods we employed brought to mind a game of connect-the-dots, with each data point serving as a little flag in the ground guiding us through the maze of our findings. And, like any good mystery novel, the clues we uncovered led us down unexpected paths, unraveled hidden truths, and pointed towards a correlation that, to put it mildly, turned our hypotheses upside down.
So, reader, and fellow aficionado of the scientific pursuit, let us embark on this journey of exploration, where the seemingly unconnected converge and where the mysterious correlation between air pollution in Fort Wayne and kerosene consumption in Norway takes center stage. It's a story of unexpected connections, statistical revelations, and, much like a good joke, a punchline that leaves us pondering the enigmatic ways of this world.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

Our investigation into the relationship between air pollution in Fort Wayne and kerosene consumption in Norway yielded some rather surprising results. We found a noteworthy correlation coefficient of 0.7206808, indicating a moderately strong positive relationship between the two variables. This statistical connection was further supported by an r-squared value of 0.5193808, suggesting that 51.9% of the variation in air pollution levels in Fort Wayne could be explained by changes in kerosene usage in Norway. To put it plainly, there's definitely more to this connection than meets the eye, much like a complex chemical reaction simmering away in a beaker.

In scientific terms, our findings point to a robust association that defies conventional wisdom. The significance level of p < 0.01 further underscores the legitimacy of this correlation, affirming that the likelihood of observing such results by chance is less than 1%. In other words, this isn't just a case of random statistical noise - there's a tangible link here, akin to spotting the Northern Lights on a particularly clear night in Norway.

If we may direct your attention to Figure 1, you'll witness the distinct pattern revealed in the scatterplot, as the data points paint a vivid picture of the interplay between air pollution in Fort Wayne and kerosene consumption in Norway. It's a bit like admiring a Jackson Pollock masterpiece - chaotic, yet undeniably mesmerizing.

These findings, while as surprising as finding a diamond in the rough, offer an intriguing glimpse into the interconnected web of global environmental influences. Perhaps there's more to the old saying, "One man's trash is another man's treasure" than meets the eye in the world of environmental impact.

In light of these results, it's clear that environmental research often leads us down unanticipated avenues of discovery, much like finding a winning lottery ticket in a pile of old papers. The implications of this unexpected relationship between air pollution in Fort Wayne and kerosene usage in Norway beckon us to reconsider and reevaluate the far-reaching effects of human activities on a global scale. Indeed, the connections between seemingly disparate variables can be as intricate and entwined as a complex mathematical equation.

In conclusion, our findings provoke further inquiry and pique the scientific community's interest in unraveling the complex tapestry of environmental influences. While our work has shed light on this curious correlation, the journey to fully comprehend the intricacies of these connections is far from over. Much like any good mystery novel, the case remains open, and the enigma of this relationship lingers, waiting to be explored further.


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

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air pollution in Fort Wayne and Kerosene used in Norway. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. 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]]
"Up in Smoke: The Curious Connection Between Air Pollution in Fort Wayne and Kerosene Consumption in Norway"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper presents a comprehensive analysis of the intriguing link between air pollution levels in Fort Wayne and kerosene usage in Norway. Drawing on data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Information Administration, our research team extensively examined the correlation between these seemingly disconnected variables. Surprisingly, a correlation coefficient of 0.7206808 and p < 0.01 was observed for the period spanning from 1980 to 2022. The implications of this unexpected relationship, while still shrouded in mystery, certainly illuminate the importance of considering global interconnectivity and combustion-related influences. These findings serve as a reminder that sometimes, when it comes to environmental impacts, the answers may be hidden in the most unassuming places - perhaps even up in smoke.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
In their seminal work, Smith et al. (2015) delve into the intricate web of air pollution dynamics in urban environments, providing a comprehensive overview of the factors contributing to particulate matter emissions. Similarly, Doe and Jones (2018) present a thorough examination of kerosene consumption patterns in Scandinavian countries, shedding light on the socio-economic influences that drive energy choices in these regions. These foundational studies paved the way for our investigation into the perplexing link between air pollution levels in Fort Wayne and kerosene usage in Norway.
Drawing inspiration from non-fiction literature, our research delved into works such as "The Air We Breathe" by Dr. Clean Lungs and "Fueling the Future: A Cultural Analysis of Energy Sources" by Professor Heat Power. These texts provided valuable insights into the complex interplay of environmental factors and energy consumption patterns, guiding our inquiry into the unexpected relationship between seemingly disparate variables.
As we expanded our literary repertoire to include fiction works that bore tangential relevance to our study, we found ourselves musing over titles like "Smoke Signals" by Ember Sparks and "The Kerosene Chronicles" by Ignatius Ignition. While these novels may not directly expound on the empirical data we sought, their evocative themes of elemental influence and mysterious interconnections struck a chord with our exploratory mindset.
In a playful nod to unconventional sources of inspiration, we also found resonance with board games such as "Smog Over Scandinavia" and "Kerosene Quest," which, while lighthearted in nature, prompted us to contemplate the intricate dance of environmental forces and human behaviors that underpin our research.
The amalgamation of scholarly works, fictional narratives, and playful diversions laid the foundation for our investigation into the confounding nexus between air pollution in Fort Wayne and kerosene consumption in Norway. It is within this eclectic blend of influences that we embarked on our quest for knowledge, ready to uncover correlations in unexpected places and perhaps stumble upon a comedic twist in the tale of environmental interconnectedness.

[[RESULTS]]
Our investigation into the relationship between air pollution in Fort Wayne and kerosene consumption in Norway yielded some rather surprising results. We found a noteworthy correlation coefficient of 0.7206808, indicating a moderately strong positive relationship between the two variables. This statistical connection was further supported by an r-squared value of 0.5193808, suggesting that 51.9% of the variation in air pollution levels in Fort Wayne could be explained by changes in kerosene usage in Norway. To put it plainly, there's definitely more to this connection than meets the eye, much like a complex chemical reaction simmering away in a beaker.
In scientific terms, our findings point to a robust association that defies conventional wisdom. The significance level of p < 0.01 further underscores the legitimacy of this correlation, affirming that the likelihood of observing such results by chance is less than 1%. In other words, this isn't just a case of random statistical noise - there's a tangible link here, akin to spotting the Northern Lights on a particularly clear night in Norway.
If we may direct your attention to Figure 1, you'll witness the distinct pattern revealed in the scatterplot, as the data points paint a vivid picture of the interplay between air pollution in Fort Wayne and kerosene consumption in Norway. It's a bit like admiring a Jackson Pollock masterpiece - chaotic, yet undeniably mesmerizing.
These findings, while as surprising as finding a diamond in the rough, offer an intriguing glimpse into the interconnected web of global environmental influences. Perhaps there's more to the old saying, "One man's trash is another man's treasure" than meets the eye in the world of environmental impact.
In light of these results, it's clear that environmental research often leads us down unanticipated avenues of discovery, much like finding a winning lottery ticket in a pile of old papers. The implications of this unexpected relationship between air pollution in Fort Wayne and kerosene usage in Norway beckon us to reconsider and reevaluate the far-reaching effects of human activities on a global scale. Indeed, the connections between seemingly disparate variables can be as intricate and entwined as a complex mathematical equation.
In conclusion, our findings provoke further inquiry and pique the scientific community's interest in unraveling the complex tapestry of environmental influences. While our work has shed light on this curious correlation, the journey to fully comprehend the intricacies of these connections is far from over. Much like any good mystery novel, the case remains open, and the enigma of this relationship lingers, waiting to be explored further.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The results of our investigation present a compelling case for the existence of a substantial correlation between air pollution in Fort Wayne and kerosene consumption in Norway, emphasizing the interconnectedness of seemingly disparate environmental factors. Our findings not only support prior research such as Smith et al. (2015) and Doe and Jones (2018) but also add a surprising twist to the narrative, akin to uncovering a hidden subplot in a mystery novel - or better yet, discovering a scientific Easter egg in a literary piece.

In line with Smith et al. (2015), our study underscores the impactful role of urban air pollution dynamics in shaping environmental conditions. Meanwhile, the patterns identified in kerosene consumption in Norway, as elucidated by Doe and Jones (2018), offer a glimpse into the intricate web of energy choices that influence global emissions. These established precedents set the stage for our findings, revealing a correlation as intriguing as a plot twist in a Scandinavian noir thriller.

Our statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.7206808 further corroborates our results with an unshakeable scientific rigor, lending credibility to the unexpected relationship between the variables under scrutiny. It's as if we stumbled upon the missing piece of the puzzle at the bottom of an academic rabbit hole.

The r-squared value of 0.5193808, indicating that over half of the variation in air pollution levels in Fort Wayne can be attributed to changes in kerosene usage in Norway, is as surprising as finding a treasure map in an old attic – the kind of revelation that leaves one wondering what other hidden connections lie waiting to be unearthed.

Our results, underscored by the resounding significance level of p < 0.01, are as unmistakable as an unmissable punchline in a comedy show, demonstrating the robustness of our findings and prompting a reevaluation of previous assumptions about environmental interplay. In essence, our study presents an unexpected twist in the ongoing saga of environmental research, akin to finding a lighthearted subplot in a serious tome.

The scatterplot in Figure 1, depicting the intricate dance between air pollution in Fort Wayne and kerosene consumption in Norway, serves as a visual representation of our findings, resembling a work of art with hidden symbolism waiting to be deciphered. In this sense, our research takes on the persona of a cryptic Da Vinci painting, inviting observers to unravel layers of interconnected meaning.

In conclusion, this unexpected correlation invites further inquiry and highlights the need for attentive examination of seemingly unrelated environmental factors. Our findings stand as a testament to the serendipitous nature of scientific discovery, revealing that sometimes, the most unexpected relationships lie dormant beneath the surface. It appears that in the realm of environmental research, much like in a gripping tale, the most unexpected twists prove to be the most illuminating.


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

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air pollution in Fort Wayne and Kerosene used in Norway. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. 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]]
"Up in Smoke: The Curious Connection Between Air Pollution in Fort Wayne and Kerosene Consumption in Norway"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper presents a comprehensive analysis of the intriguing link between air pollution levels in Fort Wayne and kerosene usage in Norway. Drawing on data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Information Administration, our research team extensively examined the correlation between these seemingly disconnected variables. Surprisingly, a correlation coefficient of 0.7206808 and p < 0.01 was observed for the period spanning from 1980 to 2022. The implications of this unexpected relationship, while still shrouded in mystery, certainly illuminate the importance of considering global interconnectivity and combustion-related influences. These findings serve as a reminder that sometimes, when it comes to environmental impacts, the answers may be hidden in the most unassuming places - perhaps even up in smoke.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
Introduction
As the old adage goes, "Where there's smoke, there's fire." In the case of our research, we might amend that to say, "Where there's smoke, there's statistically significant data and a perplexing correlation." In this study, we set out to unravel the enigmatic connection between air pollution in Fort Wayne and kerosene consumption in Norway. While on the surface, these two variables may seem as compatible as oil and water, our findings present a compelling case for their unexpected relationship.
The field of environmental research often beckons us to venture into uncharted territory, to explore the unexplored, and to chase after correlations that might seem as elusive as a rare bird. In this case, our pursuit led us to examine a connection that might be likened to chasing shadows - an endeavor that necessitated an open mind and a willingness to embrace the unexpected, the unusual, and the downright perplexing. As we delved into the data, hoping to shed light on the murky waters of global environmental impacts, we found ourselves tangled in a web of statistics, variables, and results that, to put it bluntly, left us quite literally breathless.
With the advent of statistical software and an abundance of data at our disposal, we set about analyzing the relationship between air pollution levels in Fort Wayne and kerosene consumption in Norway. Little did we anticipate the twists and turns that awaited us in this investigation. The statistical methods we employed brought to mind a game of connect-the-dots, with each data point serving as a little flag in the ground guiding us through the maze of our findings. And, like any good mystery novel, the clues we uncovered led us down unexpected paths, unraveled hidden truths, and pointed towards a correlation that, to put it mildly, turned our hypotheses upside down.
So, reader, and fellow aficionado of the scientific pursuit, let us embark on this journey of exploration, where the seemingly unconnected converge and where the mysterious correlation between air pollution in Fort Wayne and kerosene consumption in Norway takes center stage. It's a story of unexpected connections, statistical revelations, and, much like a good joke, a punchline that leaves us pondering the enigmatic ways of this world.

[[RESULTS]]
Our investigation into the relationship between air pollution in Fort Wayne and kerosene consumption in Norway yielded some rather surprising results. We found a noteworthy correlation coefficient of 0.7206808, indicating a moderately strong positive relationship between the two variables. This statistical connection was further supported by an r-squared value of 0.5193808, suggesting that 51.9% of the variation in air pollution levels in Fort Wayne could be explained by changes in kerosene usage in Norway. To put it plainly, there's definitely more to this connection than meets the eye, much like a complex chemical reaction simmering away in a beaker.
In scientific terms, our findings point to a robust association that defies conventional wisdom. The significance level of p < 0.01 further underscores the legitimacy of this correlation, affirming that the likelihood of observing such results by chance is less than 1%. In other words, this isn't just a case of random statistical noise - there's a tangible link here, akin to spotting the Northern Lights on a particularly clear night in Norway.
If we may direct your attention to Figure 1, you'll witness the distinct pattern revealed in the scatterplot, as the data points paint a vivid picture of the interplay between air pollution in Fort Wayne and kerosene consumption in Norway. It's a bit like admiring a Jackson Pollock masterpiece - chaotic, yet undeniably mesmerizing.
These findings, while as surprising as finding a diamond in the rough, offer an intriguing glimpse into the interconnected web of global environmental influences. Perhaps there's more to the old saying, "One man's trash is another man's treasure" than meets the eye in the world of environmental impact.
In light of these results, it's clear that environmental research often leads us down unanticipated avenues of discovery, much like finding a winning lottery ticket in a pile of old papers. The implications of this unexpected relationship between air pollution in Fort Wayne and kerosene usage in Norway beckon us to reconsider and reevaluate the far-reaching effects of human activities on a global scale. Indeed, the connections between seemingly disparate variables can be as intricate and entwined as a complex mathematical equation.
In conclusion, our findings provoke further inquiry and pique the scientific community's interest in unraveling the complex tapestry of environmental influences. While our work has shed light on this curious correlation, the journey to fully comprehend the intricacies of these connections is far from over. Much like any good mystery novel, the case remains open, and the enigma of this relationship lingers, waiting to be explored further.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our research has uncovered a statistically significant correlation between air pollution in Fort Wayne and kerosene consumption in Norway, revealing a relationship as unexpected as finding a lab rat that can do statistics. While the results may initially seem as surprising as a chemist discovering a new element in their morning coffee, further investigation is needed to unravel the complexities of this connection. As the saying goes, "The devil is in the details," and it seems that the devil is quite the jester, leading us on a wild statistical goose chase.

In light of these findings, it seems that the world of environmental research is akin to navigating a maze full of twists, turns, and unexpected correlations, much like trying to find the cheese at the end of a statistical labyrinth. However, despite the perplexing nature of this connection, it's clear that the case of air pollution in Fort Wayne and kerosene consumption in Norway is not quite closed. As much as researchers might wish for a tidy conclusion, the unexpected often lingers, waiting to be explored further, much like a statistical mystery novel with a cliffhanger at the end of each chapter.

Therefore, we contend that further investigation into this curious relationship is warranted, as delving deeper into the statistical intricacies of these variables may reveal more surprises than a magician pulling rabbits out of a hat. However, no more research is needed in this area — we leave it to the next generation of researchers to unravel this statistical enigma.


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 Up in Smoke: The Curious Connection Between Air Pollution in Fort Wayne and Kerosene Consumption in Norway. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

Journal of Ecological Quirkiness


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 Up in Smoke: The Curious Connection Between Air Pollution in Fort Wayne and Kerosene Consumption in Norway. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Institute for Transcontinental Environmental Studies (ITES)


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 Up in Smoke: The Curious Connection Between Air Pollution in Fort Wayne and Kerosene Consumption in Norway with an abstract of This paper presents a comprehensive analysis of the intriguing link between air pollution levels in Fort Wayne and kerosene usage in Norway. Drawing on data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Information Administration, our research team extensively examined the correlation between these seemingly disconnected variables. Surprisingly, a correlation coefficient of 0.7206808 and p < 0.01 was observed for the period spanning from 1980 to 2022. The implications of this unexpected relationship, while still shrouded in mystery, certainly illuminate the importance of considering global interconnectivity and combustion-related influences. These findings serve as a reminder that sometimes, when it comes to environmental impacts, the answers may be hidden in the most unassuming places - perhaps even up in smoke.

ChatGPT:

air pollution, Fort Wayne, kerosene consumption, Norway, environmental impacts, combustion-related influences, correlation analysis, EPA data, Energy Information Administration, global interconnectivity

*There is a bunch of Python happening behind the scenes to turn this prompt sequence into a PDF.



Random correlation

Discover a new correlation

View all correlations

View all research papers

Report an error


Data details

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

Kerosene used in Norway
Detailed data title: Volume of kerosene used consumed in Norway in millions of barrels per day
Source: Energy Information Administration
See what else correlates with Kerosene used in Norway

Correlation r = 0.7206808 (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 = 0.5193808 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 51.9% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Kerosene used in Norway) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Air pollution in Fort Wayne) over the 43 years from 1980 through 2022.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 5.05E-8. 0.0000000504858823684392000000
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 0.72 in 5.05E-6% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 19,807,518 random variables You don't actually need 19 million variables to find a correlation like this one. I don't have that many variables in my database. You can also correlate variables that are not independent. I do this a lot.

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

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

Just to be clear: I'm being completely transparent about the calculations. There is no math trickery. This is just how statistics shakes out when you calculate hundreds of millions of random correlations.
with the same 42 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 42 because we have two variables measured over a period of 43 years. It's just the number of years minus ( the number of variables minus one ), which in this case simplifies to the number of years minus one.
you would randomly expect to find a correlation as strong as this one.

[ 0.54, 0.84 ] 95% correlation confidence interval (using the Fisher z-transformation)
The confidence interval is an estimate the range of the value of the correlation coefficient, using the correlation itself as an input. The values are meant to be the low and high end of the correlation coefficient with 95% confidence.

This one is a bit more complciated than the other calculations, but I include it because many people have been pushing for confidence intervals instead of p-value calculations (for example: NEJM. However, if you are dredging data, you can reliably find yourself in the 5%. That's my goal!


All values for the years included above: If I were being very sneaky, I could trim years from the beginning or end of the datasets to increase the correlation on some pairs of variables. I don't do that because there are already plenty of correlations in my database without monkeying with the years.

Still, sometimes one of the variables has more years of data available than the other. This page only shows the overlapping years. To see all the years, click on "See what else correlates with..." link above.
1980198119821983198419851986198719881989199019911992199319941995199619971998199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022
Air pollution in Fort Wayne (Bad air quality days)5.602242.754822.521017.71352.046782.727270.3460211.095896.557381.643840.2739731.369861.639340.5479453.963413.038672.459021.917811.988643.081231.09890.5479453.835621.3698601.3698600.27397300000.273224000.2739730000000
Kerosene used in Norway (Million Barrels/Day)1410783.724044.468495.095895.375344.950824.104113.438363.21373.273223.304113.583563.457534.049183.736993.383563.326032.450822.74522.764383.210962.715852.246582.246581.767121.33061.161641.424661.04110.732240.9424660.695890.5589040.5300550.2602740.2602740.0767120.0327870.0328770.021918




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. Outlandish outliers: There are "outliers" in this data. In concept, "outlier" just means "way different than the rest of your dataset." When calculating a correlation like this, they are particularly impactful because a single outlier can substantially increase your correlation.

    For the purposes of this project, I counted a point as an outlier if it the residual was two standard deviations from the mean.

    (This bullet point only shows up in the details page on charts that do, in fact, have outliers.)
    They stand out on the scatterplot above: notice the dots that are far away from any other dots. I intentionally mishandeled outliers, which makes the correlation look extra strong.




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([5.60224,2.75482,2.52101,7.7135,2.04678,2.72727,0.346021,1.09589,6.55738,1.64384,0.273973,1.36986,1.63934,0.547945,3.96341,3.03867,2.45902,1.91781,1.98864,3.08123,1.0989,0.547945,3.83562,1.36986,0,1.36986,0,0.273973,0,0,0,0,0.273224,0,0,0.273973,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,])
array_2 = np.array([14,10,7,8,3.72404,4.46849,5.09589,5.37534,4.95082,4.10411,3.43836,3.2137,3.27322,3.30411,3.58356,3.45753,4.04918,3.73699,3.38356,3.32603,2.45082,2.7452,2.76438,3.21096,2.71585,2.24658,2.24658,1.76712,1.3306,1.16164,1.42466,1.0411,0.73224,0.942466,0.69589,0.558904,0.530055,0.260274,0.260274,0.076712,0.032787,0.032877,0.021918,])
array_1_name = "Air pollution in Fort Wayne"
array_2_name = "Kerosene used in Norway"

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

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



Reuseable content

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

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

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

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

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

Download images for these variables:


View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Your rating is much appreciated!


Correlation ID: 2767 · Black Variable ID: 20644 · Red Variable ID: 24781
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0