about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #2,768 · 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 Minneapolis and the second variable is Petroluem consumption in Bulgaria.  The chart goes from 1980 to 2021, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

The decrease in air pollution in Minneapolis led to a worldwide movement for cleaner air. This movement, as air-odynamic as it was, blew over to Bulgaria and sparked a fuel frenzy for more eco-friendly transportation options. It seems like cleaner air in one city can really fuel change in another!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image of a futuristic cityscape, shrouded in a thick, ominous smog. The skyline is dominated by towering factories billowing dark plumes of pollution into the air. Amongst the haze, Canadian geese are seen in flight, with their usual flight path disrupted, and headed in an unexpected direction. The streets of this city are packed with cars and gas stations, highlighting the increased demand for petroleum in a seemingly cyber-folk world. 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 Minneapolis and Petroluem consumption in Bulgaria. 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: Vaporwave A comic-book-style illustration with muted colors and a dotted halftone pattern from the 1960s Cyber folk Cyber folk Charcoal
ChatGPT: Cyber folk

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 Minneapolis and Petroluem consumption in Bulgaria, in the following situation: Because when air pollution increases in Minneapolis, it disrupts migratory patterns of Canadian geese, leading them to redirect their flights towards Bulgaria, inadvertently increasing demand for petroleum in the region.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In Minneapolis, smog fills the air as cars and factories emit thick black fumes. Canadian geese, usually flying in the clear sky, swerve off course and head towards Bulgaria. In Bulgaria, the streets are busy with cars lined up at gas stations, underlining the increased demand for petroleum in the country.

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: [ Cyber folk ] and depicting this scene: In Minneapolis, smog fills the air as cars and factories emit thick black fumes. Canadian geese, usually flying in the clear sky, swerve off course and head towards Bulgaria. In Bulgaria, the streets are busy with cars lined up at gas stations, underlining the increased demand for petroleum in the country. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image of a futuristic cityscape, shrouded in a thick, ominous smog. The skyline is dominated by towering factories billowing dark plumes of pollution into the air. Amongst the haze, Canadian geese are seen in flight, with their usual flight path disrupted, and headed in an unexpected direction. The streets of this city are packed with cars and gas stations, highlighting the increased demand for petroleum in a seemingly cyber-folk world.

*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 Minneapolis caused Petroluem consumption in Bulgaria to decrease. Include one good pun.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
From Minneapolis Smog to Bulgarian Fuel: Unlikely Partners in Pollution

The Journal of Ecological Contrasts

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 Air pollution in Minneapolis and Petroluem consumption in Bulgaria. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Make the title punny if you can come up with clever pun. If not, just make it sound 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 0.7257953 and p < 0.01 for 1980 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]]
"From Minneapolis Smog to Bulgarian Fuel: Unlikely Partners in Pollution"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research delves into the surprising and seemingly inexplicable relationship between air pollution in Minneapolis and petroleum consumption in Bulgaria. We utilized data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Information Administration to scrutinize this seemingly unrelated pair of variables. To our astonishment, our analysis uncovered a strong correlation coefficient of 0.7257953, with a p-value of less than 0.01, for the time frame from 1980 to 2021. Our findings spark both curiosity and amusement, prompting further investigation into this whimsical association between two seemingly mismatched entities. This study adds a layer of levity to the often solemn field of environmental and energy research, shedding light on an unexpected and comical union in the domain of pollution.


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 Air pollution in Minneapolis and Petroluem consumption in Bulgaria. 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]]
"From Minneapolis Smog to Bulgarian Fuel: Unlikely Partners in Pollution"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research delves into the surprising and seemingly inexplicable relationship between air pollution in Minneapolis and petroleum consumption in Bulgaria. We utilized data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Information Administration to scrutinize this seemingly unrelated pair of variables. To our astonishment, our analysis uncovered a strong correlation coefficient of 0.7257953, with a p-value of less than 0.01, for the time frame from 1980 to 2021. Our findings spark both curiosity and amusement, prompting further investigation into this whimsical association between two seemingly mismatched entities. This study adds a layer of levity to the often solemn field of environmental and energy research, shedding light on an unexpected and comical union in the domain of pollution.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

As environmental and energy researchers, we are often met with the solemn and serious task of unraveling the complexities of pollution and resource consumption. However, as Mark Twain once said, "Humor is mankind's greatest blessing." With this sentiment in mind, we embarked on a journey to probe the paradoxical correlation between air pollution in Minneapolis and petroleum consumption in Bulgaria.

At first glance, one might be forgiven for assuming that the connection between these two seemingly unrelated variables is as baffling as a cat wearing a monocle. However, armed with a robust dataset from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Information Administration, we endeavored to bring light to this unexpected and curious association.

Despite initial skepticism and more than a few raised eyebrows from our fellow researchers, our analysis revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.7257953, with a p-value of less than 0.01, from 1980 to 2021. This finding left us feeling as surprised as a penguin in a sauna. The strength of this correlation piqued our interest and ignited a spark of amusement in our typically stoic field of study.

While the phrase "air pollution in Minneapolis" may conjure images of tiresome traffic and billowing factory smokestacks, and "petroleum consumption in Bulgaria" may elicit thoughts of distant oil fields and sprawling fuel logistics, the statistical connection between the two has certainly injected an unexpected dose of levity into our research pursuits.

In this paper, we aim to present our findings with the same level of gravitas as a clown wearing a top hat, shedding light on this whimsical and peculiar union in the realm of pollution. Through our exploration of this unlikely partnership, we invite the academic community to join us in acknowledging the hilarity that can sometimes emerge from the depths of empirical analysis.


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 Air pollution in Minneapolis and Petroluem consumption in Bulgaria. 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. Then devolve ever further, and mention something completely ridiculous, like you conducted literature review by reading the backs of shampoo bottles.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"From Minneapolis Smog to Bulgarian Fuel: Unlikely Partners in Pollution"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research delves into the surprising and seemingly inexplicable relationship between air pollution in Minneapolis and petroleum consumption in Bulgaria. We utilized data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Information Administration to scrutinize this seemingly unrelated pair of variables. To our astonishment, our analysis uncovered a strong correlation coefficient of 0.7257953, with a p-value of less than 0.01, for the time frame from 1980 to 2021. Our findings spark both curiosity and amusement, prompting further investigation into this whimsical association between two seemingly mismatched entities. This study adds a layer of levity to the often solemn field of environmental and energy research, shedding light on an unexpected and comical union in the domain of pollution.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
As environmental and energy researchers, we are often met with the solemn and serious task of unraveling the complexities of pollution and resource consumption. However, as Mark Twain once said, "Humor is mankind's greatest blessing." With this sentiment in mind, we embarked on a journey to probe the paradoxical correlation between air pollution in Minneapolis and petroleum consumption in Bulgaria.
At first glance, one might be forgiven for assuming that the connection between these two seemingly unrelated variables is as baffling as a cat wearing a monocle. However, armed with a robust dataset from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Information Administration, we endeavored to bring light to this unexpected and curious association.
Despite initial skepticism and more than a few raised eyebrows from our fellow researchers, our analysis revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.7257953, with a p-value of less than 0.01, from 1980 to 2021. This finding left us feeling as surprised as a penguin in a sauna. The strength of this correlation piqued our interest and ignited a spark of amusement in our typically stoic field of study.
While the phrase "air pollution in Minneapolis" may conjure images of tiresome traffic and billowing factory smokestacks, and "petroleum consumption in Bulgaria" may elicit thoughts of distant oil fields and sprawling fuel logistics, the statistical connection between the two has certainly injected an unexpected dose of levity into our research pursuits.
In this paper, we aim to present our findings with the same level of gravitas as a clown wearing a top hat, shedding light on this whimsical and peculiar union in the realm of pollution. Through our exploration of this unlikely partnership, we invite the academic community to join us in acknowledging the hilarity that can sometimes emerge from the depths of empirical analysis.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The authors find that the connection between air pollution in Minneapolis and petroleum consumption in Bulgaria has sparked both intrigue and amusement within the academic sphere. In "Smith et al.'s Analysis of Global Air Quality," the authors explore the multifaceted factors contributing to air pollution in urban centers, laying the groundwork for understanding the complexities of atmospheric pollutants. Meanwhile, in "Doe and Jones' Examination of Global Fuel Consumption Trends," the researchers provide a comprehensive overview of petroleum usage patterns, delving into the depths of worldwide energy consumption.

Turning to non-fiction books that provide valuable insights, "The Economics of Energy and the Environment" by Smith and Johnson offers a rigorous exploration of the interplay between energy production and environmental impact, providing a scholarly foundation for understanding the intricate dynamics at play. Additionally, "Air Pollution and Health" by Doe and Smith elucidates the stark ramifications of air pollution on public health, offering a sobering reminder of the serious consequences of environmental degradation.

In the realm of fiction, "The Smog of Minneapolis" by Jane Air and "Bulgarian Petroleum Tales" by Leo Tolstoil capture the essence of the interconnectedness between seemingly disparate entities, albeit in a more whimsical and metaphorical manner than the academic literature.

Venturing into unorthodox sources of information, the authors also gleaned insights from unexpected places, including the backs of shampoo bottles, which surprisingly offered an abundance of lighthearted and, if nothing else, fragrant guidance in navigating the convoluted web of air pollution and petroleum consumption. While the veracity of shampoo bottle claims may be questionable, the authors nonetheless found a refreshing departure from the typically weighty tomes of scholarly research.


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 Air pollution in Minneapolis and Petroluem consumption in Bulgaria. 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 Environmental Protection Agency and Energy Information Administration . You used data from 1980 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]]
"From Minneapolis Smog to Bulgarian Fuel: Unlikely Partners in Pollution"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research delves into the surprising and seemingly inexplicable relationship between air pollution in Minneapolis and petroleum consumption in Bulgaria. We utilized data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Information Administration to scrutinize this seemingly unrelated pair of variables. To our astonishment, our analysis uncovered a strong correlation coefficient of 0.7257953, with a p-value of less than 0.01, for the time frame from 1980 to 2021. Our findings spark both curiosity and amusement, prompting further investigation into this whimsical association between two seemingly mismatched entities. This study adds a layer of levity to the often solemn field of environmental and energy research, shedding light on an unexpected and comical union in the domain of pollution.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
As environmental and energy researchers, we are often met with the solemn and serious task of unraveling the complexities of pollution and resource consumption. However, as Mark Twain once said, "Humor is mankind's greatest blessing." With this sentiment in mind, we embarked on a journey to probe the paradoxical correlation between air pollution in Minneapolis and petroleum consumption in Bulgaria.
At first glance, one might be forgiven for assuming that the connection between these two seemingly unrelated variables is as baffling as a cat wearing a monocle. However, armed with a robust dataset from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Information Administration, we endeavored to bring light to this unexpected and curious association.
Despite initial skepticism and more than a few raised eyebrows from our fellow researchers, our analysis revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.7257953, with a p-value of less than 0.01, from 1980 to 2021. This finding left us feeling as surprised as a penguin in a sauna. The strength of this correlation piqued our interest and ignited a spark of amusement in our typically stoic field of study.
While the phrase "air pollution in Minneapolis" may conjure images of tiresome traffic and billowing factory smokestacks, and "petroleum consumption in Bulgaria" may elicit thoughts of distant oil fields and sprawling fuel logistics, the statistical connection between the two has certainly injected an unexpected dose of levity into our research pursuits.
In this paper, we aim to present our findings with the same level of gravitas as a clown wearing a top hat, shedding light on this whimsical and peculiar union in the realm of pollution. Through our exploration of this unlikely partnership, we invite the academic community to join us in acknowledging the hilarity that can sometimes emerge from the depths of empirical analysis.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

The methodology employed in this research endeavor sought to unravel the mysterious connection between air pollution in Minneapolis and petroleum consumption in Bulgaria. To achieve this, we embarked on a statistical odyssey that involved the collection and analysis of data from diverse sources, all while refraining from getting lost in a statistical labyrinth.

Data Collection:
The primary sources of data for this study were the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Energy Information Administration (EIA). We indulged in the exquisite art of data collection, scouring the internet like determined treasure hunters sifting through digital sands to unearth the nuggets of information pertinent to our investigation. While undertaking this digital quest, we maintained a keen eye for data spanning the timeframe from 1980 to 2021, ensuring a thorough and comprehensive exploration of the relationship between our two seemingly incongruous variables.

Data Analysis:
Once the data was procured, we engaged in an enthralling display of statistical prestidigitation, subjecting the collected data to rigorous analysis. We employed various statistical methods, including the use of correlation coefficients and regression analysis, to unravel the intricate dance between air pollution in Minneapolis and petroleum consumption in Bulgaria. Our goal was to untangle the statistical web woven by these seemingly disparate variables, employing tools like scatter plots and residual analysis to unveil insights that would otherwise remain as elusive as a unicorn in the mist.

Quality Control:
In our pursuit of statistical clarity, we maintained a strict regimen of quality control, ensuring that our data analysis remained as meticulous as a watchmaker crafting a miniature timepiece. Robust methods were employed to validate the reliability and validity of our findings, guarding against statistical gremlins that might seek to infiltrate our conclusions. Through these rigorous measures, we endeavored to present findings as unassailable as a fortress made of statistical stone.

Ethical Considerations:
In the spirit of academic integrity, we adhered to the ethical guidelines of data usage and stewardship. We treated our data with the utmost respect, like archaeologists delicately brushing away layers of soil to reveal ancient artifacts. Privacy and confidentiality were paramount, as we meticulously navigated the seas of data ethics to ensure all practices adhered to the highest standards of integrity and respect for the information at hand.

In conclusion, our methodology blended the precision of statistical analysis with the whimsy of our seemingly unlikely research subject, ultimately unraveling a connection as unexpected as a magician pulling a rabbit out of a statistical hat. Through this methodological pursuit, we have endeavored to cast light on the amusing and improbable partnership between air pollution in Minneapolis and petroleum consumption in Bulgaria, inviting the academic community to join us in this statistical escapade.


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 Air pollution in Minneapolis and Petroluem consumption in Bulgaria. 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 Environmental Protection Agency and Energy Information Administration .

For the time period 1980 to 2021, you found a correlation 0.7257953, r-squared of 0.5267788, 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]]
"From Minneapolis Smog to Bulgarian Fuel: Unlikely Partners in Pollution"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research delves into the surprising and seemingly inexplicable relationship between air pollution in Minneapolis and petroleum consumption in Bulgaria. We utilized data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Information Administration to scrutinize this seemingly unrelated pair of variables. To our astonishment, our analysis uncovered a strong correlation coefficient of 0.7257953, with a p-value of less than 0.01, for the time frame from 1980 to 2021. Our findings spark both curiosity and amusement, prompting further investigation into this whimsical association between two seemingly mismatched entities. This study adds a layer of levity to the often solemn field of environmental and energy research, shedding light on an unexpected and comical union in the domain of pollution.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
As environmental and energy researchers, we are often met with the solemn and serious task of unraveling the complexities of pollution and resource consumption. However, as Mark Twain once said, "Humor is mankind's greatest blessing." With this sentiment in mind, we embarked on a journey to probe the paradoxical correlation between air pollution in Minneapolis and petroleum consumption in Bulgaria.
At first glance, one might be forgiven for assuming that the connection between these two seemingly unrelated variables is as baffling as a cat wearing a monocle. However, armed with a robust dataset from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Information Administration, we endeavored to bring light to this unexpected and curious association.
Despite initial skepticism and more than a few raised eyebrows from our fellow researchers, our analysis revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.7257953, with a p-value of less than 0.01, from 1980 to 2021. This finding left us feeling as surprised as a penguin in a sauna. The strength of this correlation piqued our interest and ignited a spark of amusement in our typically stoic field of study.
While the phrase "air pollution in Minneapolis" may conjure images of tiresome traffic and billowing factory smokestacks, and "petroleum consumption in Bulgaria" may elicit thoughts of distant oil fields and sprawling fuel logistics, the statistical connection between the two has certainly injected an unexpected dose of levity into our research pursuits.
In this paper, we aim to present our findings with the same level of gravitas as a clown wearing a top hat, shedding light on this whimsical and peculiar union in the realm of pollution. Through our exploration of this unlikely partnership, we invite the academic community to join us in acknowledging the hilarity that can sometimes emerge from the depths of empirical analysis.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The research findings indicate a surprisingly strong correlation between air pollution in Minneapolis and petroleum consumption in Bulgaria. The correlation coefficient of 0.7257953 and the r-squared value of 0.5267788 suggest a robust relationship between these two seemingly incongruous variables. The p-value of less than 0.01 further bolsters the validity of this unexpected connection.

Upon examining the scatterplot (Fig. 1), the data points form a clear and compelling pattern, illustrating the striking association between air pollution in Minneapolis and petroleum consumption in Bulgaria. The plot is as eye-catching as a flamingo in a snowstorm, underscoring the notable relationship between these seemingly disparate entities.

These findings not only challenge traditional assumptions about environmental and energy dynamics but also inject a sense of humor into our typically serious academic pursuits. Much like a magician pulling a rabbit out of a hat, this correlation has left us both astonished and amused, prompting further investigation into this whimsical partnership in the realm of pollution.

The statistical significance of this correlation piques our curiosity and beckons us to delve deeper into the underlying mechanisms behind this unlikely pairing. We invite the academic community to join us in unraveling the enigma of this unexpected connection and to appreciate the humor that emerges from the depths of empirical analysis.


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 Air pollution in Minneapolis and Petroluem consumption in Bulgaria. 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]]
"From Minneapolis Smog to Bulgarian Fuel: Unlikely Partners in Pollution"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research delves into the surprising and seemingly inexplicable relationship between air pollution in Minneapolis and petroleum consumption in Bulgaria. We utilized data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Information Administration to scrutinize this seemingly unrelated pair of variables. To our astonishment, our analysis uncovered a strong correlation coefficient of 0.7257953, with a p-value of less than 0.01, for the time frame from 1980 to 2021. Our findings spark both curiosity and amusement, prompting further investigation into this whimsical association between two seemingly mismatched entities. This study adds a layer of levity to the often solemn field of environmental and energy research, shedding light on an unexpected and comical union in the domain of pollution.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The authors find that the connection between air pollution in Minneapolis and petroleum consumption in Bulgaria has sparked both intrigue and amusement within the academic sphere. In "Smith et al.'s Analysis of Global Air Quality," the authors explore the multifaceted factors contributing to air pollution in urban centers, laying the groundwork for understanding the complexities of atmospheric pollutants. Meanwhile, in "Doe and Jones' Examination of Global Fuel Consumption Trends," the researchers provide a comprehensive overview of petroleum usage patterns, delving into the depths of worldwide energy consumption.
Turning to non-fiction books that provide valuable insights, "The Economics of Energy and the Environment" by Smith and Johnson offers a rigorous exploration of the interplay between energy production and environmental impact, providing a scholarly foundation for understanding the intricate dynamics at play. Additionally, "Air Pollution and Health" by Doe and Smith elucidates the stark ramifications of air pollution on public health, offering a sobering reminder of the serious consequences of environmental degradation.
In the realm of fiction, "The Smog of Minneapolis" by Jane Air and "Bulgarian Petroleum Tales" by Leo Tolstoil capture the essence of the interconnectedness between seemingly disparate entities, albeit in a more whimsical and metaphorical manner than the academic literature.
Venturing into unorthodox sources of information, the authors also gleaned insights from unexpected places, including the backs of shampoo bottles, which surprisingly offered an abundance of lighthearted and, if nothing else, fragrant guidance in navigating the convoluted web of air pollution and petroleum consumption. While the veracity of shampoo bottle claims may be questionable, the authors nonetheless found a refreshing departure from the typically weighty tomes of scholarly research.

[[RESULTS]]
The research findings indicate a surprisingly strong correlation between air pollution in Minneapolis and petroleum consumption in Bulgaria. The correlation coefficient of 0.7257953 and the r-squared value of 0.5267788 suggest a robust relationship between these two seemingly incongruous variables. The p-value of less than 0.01 further bolsters the validity of this unexpected connection.
Upon examining the scatterplot (Fig. 1), the data points form a clear and compelling pattern, illustrating the striking association between air pollution in Minneapolis and petroleum consumption in Bulgaria. The plot is as eye-catching as a flamingo in a snowstorm, underscoring the notable relationship between these seemingly disparate entities.
These findings not only challenge traditional assumptions about environmental and energy dynamics but also inject a sense of humor into our typically serious academic pursuits. Much like a magician pulling a rabbit out of a hat, this correlation has left us both astonished and amused, prompting further investigation into this whimsical partnership in the realm of pollution.
The statistical significance of this correlation piques our curiosity and beckons us to delve deeper into the underlying mechanisms behind this unlikely pairing. We invite the academic community to join us in unraveling the enigma of this unexpected connection and to appreciate the humor that emerges from the depths of empirical analysis.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The results of our analysis provide compelling evidence for the unexpected and seemingly inexplicable connection between air pollution in Minneapolis and petroleum consumption in Bulgaria. The robust correlation coefficient of 0.7257953, along with a significant p-value of less than 0.01, lends credence to this whimsical association. These findings not only add levity to the typically grave discourse on environmental and energy research but also raise thought-provoking questions regarding the underlying mechanisms driving this peculiar relationship.

Our results echo the prior research in surprising and amusing ways. Smith et al.'s analysis of global air quality may have set the stage for understanding atmospheric pollutants, but our study adds a twist by revealing Minneapolis's contribution to an international comedy of errors in the arena of pollution. Similarly, while Doe and Jones delved into worldwide energy consumption patterns, our findings provide a lighthearted yet compelling dimension by illustrating Bulgaria's unwitting partnership with Minneapolis smog.

Despite the initial hilarity of the Minneapolis-Bulgaria connection, our results underscore the importance of delving deeper into the root causes of this unlikely correlation. In essence, this unexpected relationship serves as a playful reminder not to underestimate the interconnectedness of our world. Just as the back of a shampoo bottle may offer an unexpected quip or two, so too does this research offer a light-hearted yet thought-provoking revelation of the interconnectedness of seemingly unrelated variables.

It is essential to acknowledge the limitations of our study, as humor can sometimes obfuscate the seriousness of the inquiry. Yet, much like bananas and peanut butter or cheese and apple pie, seemingly inconceivable pairings can often lead to unexpected delight. As such, our study serves as a peculiar reminder that even the most unlikely partnerships can yield meaningful insights, giving rise to a new avenue for both amusement and scholarly investigation in the field of environmental and energy research.


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 Air pollution in Minneapolis and Petroluem consumption in Bulgaria. 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]]
"From Minneapolis Smog to Bulgarian Fuel: Unlikely Partners in Pollution"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research delves into the surprising and seemingly inexplicable relationship between air pollution in Minneapolis and petroleum consumption in Bulgaria. We utilized data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Information Administration to scrutinize this seemingly unrelated pair of variables. To our astonishment, our analysis uncovered a strong correlation coefficient of 0.7257953, with a p-value of less than 0.01, for the time frame from 1980 to 2021. Our findings spark both curiosity and amusement, prompting further investigation into this whimsical association between two seemingly mismatched entities. This study adds a layer of levity to the often solemn field of environmental and energy research, shedding light on an unexpected and comical union in the domain of pollution.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
As environmental and energy researchers, we are often met with the solemn and serious task of unraveling the complexities of pollution and resource consumption. However, as Mark Twain once said, "Humor is mankind's greatest blessing." With this sentiment in mind, we embarked on a journey to probe the paradoxical correlation between air pollution in Minneapolis and petroleum consumption in Bulgaria.
At first glance, one might be forgiven for assuming that the connection between these two seemingly unrelated variables is as baffling as a cat wearing a monocle. However, armed with a robust dataset from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Information Administration, we endeavored to bring light to this unexpected and curious association.
Despite initial skepticism and more than a few raised eyebrows from our fellow researchers, our analysis revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.7257953, with a p-value of less than 0.01, from 1980 to 2021. This finding left us feeling as surprised as a penguin in a sauna. The strength of this correlation piqued our interest and ignited a spark of amusement in our typically stoic field of study.
While the phrase "air pollution in Minneapolis" may conjure images of tiresome traffic and billowing factory smokestacks, and "petroleum consumption in Bulgaria" may elicit thoughts of distant oil fields and sprawling fuel logistics, the statistical connection between the two has certainly injected an unexpected dose of levity into our research pursuits.
In this paper, we aim to present our findings with the same level of gravitas as a clown wearing a top hat, shedding light on this whimsical and peculiar union in the realm of pollution. Through our exploration of this unlikely partnership, we invite the academic community to join us in acknowledging the hilarity that can sometimes emerge from the depths of empirical analysis.

[[RESULTS]]
The research findings indicate a surprisingly strong correlation between air pollution in Minneapolis and petroleum consumption in Bulgaria. The correlation coefficient of 0.7257953 and the r-squared value of 0.5267788 suggest a robust relationship between these two seemingly incongruous variables. The p-value of less than 0.01 further bolsters the validity of this unexpected connection.
Upon examining the scatterplot (Fig. 1), the data points form a clear and compelling pattern, illustrating the striking association between air pollution in Minneapolis and petroleum consumption in Bulgaria. The plot is as eye-catching as a flamingo in a snowstorm, underscoring the notable relationship between these seemingly disparate entities.
These findings not only challenge traditional assumptions about environmental and energy dynamics but also inject a sense of humor into our typically serious academic pursuits. Much like a magician pulling a rabbit out of a hat, this correlation has left us both astonished and amused, prompting further investigation into this whimsical partnership in the realm of pollution.
The statistical significance of this correlation piques our curiosity and beckons us to delve deeper into the underlying mechanisms behind this unlikely pairing. We invite the academic community to join us in unraveling the enigma of this unexpected connection and to appreciate the humor that emerges from the depths of empirical analysis.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our research has revealed a compelling and inexplicable correlation between air pollution in Minneapolis and petroleum consumption in Bulgaria. While this unusual pairing may seem as mismatched as a pineapple on a pizza, the statistical evidence is as convincing as a stand-up comedian with impeccable timing. The p-value of less than 0.01 leaves no room for doubt, indicating a relationship stronger than the bond between peanut butter and jelly.

The discovery of this unlikely alliance not only challenges conventional wisdom in the realms of environmental and energy research but also injects a much-needed dose of amusement into our often somber academic pursuits. It's akin to finding a clown car in rush-hour traffic – unexpected, but undeniably entertaining.

As we reflect on these findings, it becomes clear that the universe of empirical analysis is as full of surprises as a birthday party thrown by a magician. Further exploration into the whimsical partnership between these seemingly disparate entities holds the promise of uncovering hidden mechanisms that are as captivating as a mystery novel with a comedic twist.

In light of these revelatory results, it is evident that no further research is needed in this area. The correlation between air pollution in Minneapolis and petroleum consumption in Bulgaria is as robust as a rubber chicken at a circus, leaving little room for additional investigation. We encourage the academic community to embrace the levity and intrigue that emerge from unexpected empirical connections and to carry forth the spirit of curiosity and humor in their own scholarly endeavors.


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 From Minneapolis Smog to Bulgarian Fuel: Unlikely Partners in Pollution. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Ecological Contrasts


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 From Minneapolis Smog to Bulgarian Fuel: Unlikely Partners in Pollution. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for Cross-Cultural Environmental Research


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide potential search keywords separated by commas. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide potential search keywords for a paper titled From Minneapolis Smog to Bulgarian Fuel: Unlikely Partners in Pollution with an abstract of This research delves into the surprising and seemingly inexplicable relationship between air pollution in Minneapolis and petroleum consumption in Bulgaria. We utilized data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Information Administration to scrutinize this seemingly unrelated pair of variables. To our astonishment, our analysis uncovered a strong correlation coefficient of 0.7257953, with a p-value of less than 0.01, for the time frame from 1980 to 2021. Our findings spark both curiosity and amusement, prompting further investigation into this whimsical association between two seemingly mismatched entities. This study adds a layer of levity to the often solemn field of environmental and energy research, shedding light on an unexpected and comical union in the domain of pollution.

ChatGPT:

Minneapolis air pollution, Bulgaria petroleum consumption, air pollution correlation, Minneapolis smog data, Bulgarian fuel consumption, EPA air pollution data, EIA petroleum consumption, pollution correlation analysis, environmental research, energy research, pollution relationship, pollution correlation coefficient, pollution p-value, pollution data analysis, pollution whimsical association

*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 Minneapolis
Detailed data title: Percentage of days 'unhealthy' or worse air quality in Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
See what else correlates with Air pollution in Minneapolis

Petroluem consumption in Bulgaria
Detailed data title: Volume of petroluem consumption consumed in Bulgaria in millions of barrels per day
Source: Energy Information Administration
See what else correlates with Petroluem consumption in Bulgaria

Correlation r = 0.7257953 (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 = 0.5267788 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 52.7% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Petroluem consumption in Bulgaria) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Air pollution in Minneapolis) over the 42 years from 1980 through 2021.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 5.4E-8. 0.0000000536793090998765300000
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 0.73 in 5.4E-6% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 18,629,152 random variables You don't actually need 18 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 41 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 41 because we have two variables measured over a period of 42 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.
198019811982198319841985198619871988198919901991199219931994199519961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172018201920202021
Air pollution in Minneapolis (Bad air quality days)3.005462.191781.369864.383561.639341.3698601.917814.371581.095890.5479450.8219180.546448001.36986000.2739730.2739730.2732240.8219180.5479450.82191801.9178100.54794500.273973000.2732240000.2732240000.2732240.821918
Petroluem consumption in Bulgaria (Million Barrels/Day)306294295295294290286.1276.4278.2235.9192120.9129.2116.9126.5130.7118.3106.5102.72197.189.01993.9795.583101.032102.938109.702110.908106.517104.987100.84489.061484.047386.299180.918588.9967959791.052492.77397.761889.778894.4061




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([3.00546,2.19178,1.36986,4.38356,1.63934,1.36986,0,1.91781,4.37158,1.09589,0.547945,0.821918,0.546448,0,0,1.36986,0,0,0.273973,0.273973,0.273224,0.821918,0.547945,0.821918,0,1.91781,0,0.547945,0,0.273973,0,0,0.273224,0,0,0,0.273224,0,0,0,0.273224,0.821918,])
array_2 = np.array([306,294,295,295,294,290,286.1,276.4,278.2,235.9,192,120.9,129.2,116.9,126.5,130.7,118.3,106.5,102.721,97.1,89.019,93.97,95.583,101.032,102.938,109.702,110.908,106.517,104.987,100.844,89.0614,84.0473,86.2991,80.9185,88.9967,95,97,91.0524,92.773,97.7618,89.7788,94.4061,])
array_1_name = "Air pollution in Minneapolis"
array_2_name = "Petroluem consumption in Bulgaria"

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

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



Reuseable content

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

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

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

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

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

Download images for these variables:


View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Your dedication to rating warms my heart!


Correlation ID: 2768 · Black Variable ID: 20904 · Red Variable ID: 24241
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0