Download png, svg
AI explanation
As the air got cleaner, it seems the fire in people's hearts just wasn't igniting the same way. It's like the arsonists were thinking, "Why start a fire when you can just take a breath of fresh air and chi-NOPE! Not today, urge to burn stuff!" Maybe they realized there are better ways to feel fired up than setting things ablaze, or perhaps they were simply too busy enjoying the newfound 'arso-nice' of breathing without all that pollution. One thing's for sure - this correlation has cleared the air on just how unexpected and smokin' hot the connection between air quality and arson rates can be.Model: dalle-3
Prompt: [A photo-realistic image] Create an aerial view of Houston where the city is shrouded in smog, with the skyline partially obscured. The smog is slowly dissipating, revealing a clear and bright blue sky. Show people on the streets visibly relieved, taking deep breaths of fresh air. In the foreground, depict a group of Texas arsonists who have put down their fire-lighting equipment. Instead, they are gathered at a community event, enjoying line dancing and BBQ competitions under the warm glow of the evening sun. The scene should reflect the contrast between the once-polluted city and the now vibrant, clean atmosphere as people come together to celebrate. 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 Houston and Arson in Texas. 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: Cyberpunk Art nouveau Charcoal a Polaroid photo A photo-realistic image
ChatGPT: A photo-realistic image
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 Houston and Arson in Texas, in the following situation: As air pollution decreased in Houston, so did the "fire in the lungs" feeling, causing Texan arsonists to focus on other activities like line dancing and BBQ competitions instead of setting things on fire.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: The smog over Houston begins to clear, revealing a bright blue sky. People breathe easier, free from the heavy "fire in the lungs" feeling. Meanwhile, Texas arsonists gather to enjoy line dancing and BBQ competitions, their fire-lighting activities replaced by the warm glow of community events.
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 photo-realistic image ] and depicting this scene: The smog over Houston begins to clear, revealing a bright blue sky. People breathe easier, free from the heavy "fire in the lungs" feeling. Meanwhile, Texas arsonists gather to enjoy line dancing and BBQ competitions, their fire-lighting activities replaced by the warm glow of community events. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: [A photo-realistic image] Create an aerial view of Houston where the city is shrouded in smog, with the skyline partially obscured. The smog is slowly dissipating, revealing a clear and bright blue sky. Show people on the streets visibly relieved, taking deep breaths of fresh air. In the foreground, depict a group of Texas arsonists who have put down their fire-lighting equipment. Instead, they are gathered at a community event, enjoying line dancing and BBQ competitions under the warm glow of the evening sun. The scene should reflect the contrast between the once-polluted city and the now vibrant, clean atmosphere as people come together to celebrate.
*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.
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 Houston caused Arson in Texas to decrease. Include one good pun.
AI academic paper
Up in Smoke: Unearthing the Connection Between Air Pollution in Houston and Arson in Texas Journal of Ecological Epidemiology Jan 2024 Reminder: This paper is AI-generated. Not real! |
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a researcher writing an academic paper.You write titles and abstracts of goofy academic research papers.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, and add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air pollution in Houston and Arson in Texas. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.
Make the title punny if you can come up with clever pun. If not, make it sound serious.
Your research team used data from Environmental Protection Agency and FBI Criminal Justice Information Services to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.7980063 and p < 0.01 for 1985 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: Unearthing the Connection Between Air Pollution in Houston and Arson in Texas
[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the intertwined relationship between air pollution in Houston and arson in Texas. Utilizing data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the FBI's Criminal Justice Information Services, we sought to unravel the enigmatic link that has remained elusive for decades. Our findings reveal a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.7980063 and a strikingly significant p-value of less than 0.01, covering the time span from 1985 to 2022.
The results not only shed light on the statistical association between these seemingly unrelated phenomena but also raise intriguing questions about the underlying mechanisms at play. While our endeavor initially seemed to be a shot in the dark, the data has ignited our curiosity and stoked the flames of scientific inquiry. This paper not only kindles the flame of understanding but also fans the embers of discussion about the possible implications for public policy and urban planning.
As we sift through the smokescreen of data, we invite readers to join us in this journey of discovery where the sparks of knowledge are fueled by rigorous analysis and a healthy dose of academic humor.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a researcher writing an academic paper.You draft the introduction section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air pollution in Houston and Arson in Texas. 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: Unearthing the Connection Between Air Pollution in Houston and Arson in Texas
[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the intertwined relationship between air pollution in Houston and arson in Texas. Utilizing data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the FBI's Criminal Justice Information Services, we sought to unravel the enigmatic link that has remained elusive for decades. Our findings reveal a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.7980063 and a strikingly significant p-value of less than 0.01, covering the time span from 1985 to 2022.
The results not only shed light on the statistical association between these seemingly unrelated phenomena but also raise intriguing questions about the underlying mechanisms at play. While our endeavor initially seemed to be a shot in the dark, the data has ignited our curiosity and stoked the flames of scientific inquiry. This paper not only kindles the flame of understanding but also fans the embers of discussion about the possible implications for public policy and urban planning.
As we sift through the smokescreen of data, we invite readers to join us in this journey of discovery where the sparks of knowledge are fueled by rigorous analysis and a healthy dose of academic humor.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The connection between air pollution and arson is not one that readily ignites scientific curiosity, yet the potential for a smoldering relationship has long been suspected. Like a pair of elusive fireflies in the dark, these two phenomena have danced around each other, their sparks threatening to set ablaze the margins of statistical significance. As researchers, we find ourselves drawn to this unconventional pairing - like moths to a flame - in a quest to unearth the hidden embers of correlation and causation.
The backdrop for our study is the sprawling metropolis of Houston, Texas, a city known for its industrial prowess and its occasional bouts of hazy skies. Intertwined with this urban landscape is the alarming frequency of arson incidents across the state of Texas, setting the stage for an inferno of questions regarding the potential relationship with air pollution. With the Environmental Protection Agency serving as our beacon in the fog of data, and the FBI's Criminal Justice Information Services acting as our watchtower, we embarked on a journey to make sense of these seemingly disparate elements.
Armed with an arsenal of statistical tools, we sought to unravel the tangled labyrinth of variables, hoping to find the smoking gun that would confirm or extinguish the suspicions surrounding the link between air quality and acts of intentional fire-setting. Much like forensic scientists inspecting the residue of a suspicious blaze, we meticulously combed through the data spanning nearly four decades, meticulously peeling back the layers of smoke and mirrors to reveal the truth hidden within the statistical ashes. The pursuit of truth is not for the faint of heart; it requires the tenacity of a determined firefighter and the precision of a meticulous arson investigator.
As we embark on this scholarly journey, we are reminded of the famous words of Robert Frost, "Some say the world will end in fire, some say in ice." But what if the world ends in a hazy plume of industrial emissions and the flicker of a match? Our quest is fueled not only by a desire to unravel the enigma of this incendiary relationship but also by a deep-seated appreciation for the unexpected discoveries that often lie dormant within data, waiting to be kindled into illuminating findings.
Join us as we venture into this complex labyrinth, armed with the torch of scientific inquiry and the shield of rigorous analysis. Together, let us navigate the smoky corridors of correlation and causation, as we strive to shed light on this curious and, dare we say, fiery connection.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a researcher writing an academic paper.You draft a literature review section of an academic research paper, that starts out dry for the first few sentences but then becomes hilarious and goofy.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air pollution in Houston and Arson in Texas. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.
Speak in the present tense for this section (the authors find...), as is common in academic research paper literature reviews. Name the sources in a format similar to this: In "Book," the authors find lorem and ipsum.
Make up the lorem and ipsum part, but make it sound related to the topic at hand.
Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then devolve ever further, and mention something completely ridiculous, like you conducted literature review by reading CVS receipts.
Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Up in Smoke: Unearthing the Connection Between Air Pollution in Houston and Arson in Texas
[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the intertwined relationship between air pollution in Houston and arson in Texas. Utilizing data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the FBI's Criminal Justice Information Services, we sought to unravel the enigmatic link that has remained elusive for decades. Our findings reveal a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.7980063 and a strikingly significant p-value of less than 0.01, covering the time span from 1985 to 2022.
The results not only shed light on the statistical association between these seemingly unrelated phenomena but also raise intriguing questions about the underlying mechanisms at play. While our endeavor initially seemed to be a shot in the dark, the data has ignited our curiosity and stoked the flames of scientific inquiry. This paper not only kindles the flame of understanding but also fans the embers of discussion about the possible implications for public policy and urban planning.
As we sift through the smokescreen of data, we invite readers to join us in this journey of discovery where the sparks of knowledge are fueled by rigorous analysis and a healthy dose of academic humor.
-------
And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The connection between air pollution and arson is not one that readily ignites scientific curiosity, yet the potential for a smoldering relationship has long been suspected. Like a pair of elusive fireflies in the dark, these two phenomena have danced around each other, their sparks threatening to set ablaze the margins of statistical significance. As researchers, we find ourselves drawn to this unconventional pairing - like moths to a flame - in a quest to unearth the hidden embers of correlation and causation.
The backdrop for our study is the sprawling metropolis of Houston, Texas, a city known for its industrial prowess and its occasional bouts of hazy skies. Intertwined with this urban landscape is the alarming frequency of arson incidents across the state of Texas, setting the stage for an inferno of questions regarding the potential relationship with air pollution. With the Environmental Protection Agency serving as our beacon in the fog of data, and the FBI's Criminal Justice Information Services acting as our watchtower, we embarked on a journey to make sense of these seemingly disparate elements.
Armed with an arsenal of statistical tools, we sought to unravel the tangled labyrinth of variables, hoping to find the smoking gun that would confirm or extinguish the suspicions surrounding the link between air quality and acts of intentional fire-setting. Much like forensic scientists inspecting the residue of a suspicious blaze, we meticulously combed through the data spanning nearly four decades, meticulously peeling back the layers of smoke and mirrors to reveal the truth hidden within the statistical ashes. The pursuit of truth is not for the faint of heart; it requires the tenacity of a determined firefighter and the precision of a meticulous arson investigator.
As we embark on this scholarly journey, we are reminded of the famous words of Robert Frost, "Some say the world will end in fire, some say in ice." But what if the world ends in a hazy plume of industrial emissions and the flicker of a match? Our quest is fueled not only by a desire to unravel the enigma of this incendiary relationship but also by a deep-seated appreciation for the unexpected discoveries that often lie dormant within data, waiting to be kindled into illuminating findings.
Join us as we venture into this complex labyrinth, armed with the torch of scientific inquiry and the shield of rigorous analysis. Together, let us navigate the smoky corridors of correlation and causation, as we strive to shed light on this curious and, dare we say, fiery connection.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
In "The Correlation Between Air Quality and Criminal Behavior," Smith et al. explore the potential relationship between air pollution and acts of arson. Their findings indicate a moderate positive correlation between particulate matter levels in the air and the incidence of intentional fires, prompting further investigation into the mechanisms underlying this curious association.
Doe's study, "Emissions and Arson: Uncovering the Inextricable Link," delves into the intricate web of factors that may contribute to the propensity for arson in areas with high levels of air pollution. The researchers observe a statistically significant association between sulfur dioxide emissions and the likelihood of arson, presenting compelling evidence for a nuanced interplay between environmental factors and criminal behavior.
Jones et al., in "Smoke Signals: Exploring the Nexus of Air Quality and Arson," present a comprehensive analysis of ambient air pollutant concentrations and the spatial distribution of arson incidents in urban areas. Their study highlights the spatial clustering of arson events in close proximity to industrial zones with elevated levels of air pollution, raising provocative questions about the potential role of environmental exposure in incendiary acts.
Furthermore, works such as "Air Pollution and Its Effects on Houston's Urban Landscape" by Environmental Research Group and "The Arsonist's Handbook" by Jane Doe provide valuable insights into the contextual backdrop against which the relationship between air pollution in Houston and arson in Texas unfolds.
In a departure from non-fiction literature, fictional works such as "The Smoke Jumper" by Nicholas Evans and "Heat Wave" by Richard Castle offer a tantalizing glimpse into the realm of fires, albeit in a different context. While these works may not directly address the specific nexus of air pollution and arson, they serve as a reminder of the enthralling allure of fire-related narratives that continue to captivate audiences.
In a whimsically unconventional approach to literature review, the authors also draw inspiration from eclectic sources, including but not limited to grocery store receipts, fortune cookie messages, and the enigmatic musings of a fortune-telling parrot named Percy. While unconventional, these sources have ignited fresh perspectives and sparked unexpected connections, underscoring the multifaceted nature of scholarly inquiry.
As the authors sift through the voluminous body of literature on this subject, they have also gleaned insights from peculiar sources such as interpretive dance performances, cryptic graffiti messages, and the fleeting whispers of the wind. While unconventional, these unconventional sources have provided a breath of fresh air in the oftentimes dense landscape of academic research, infusing the authors' investigation with a dash of spontaneity and playfulness. After all, scholarly pursuit should not be devoid of whimsy, and sometimes the most unexpected sources yield the brightest sparks of inspiration.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a researcher writing an academic paper.You draft the methodology section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air pollution in Houston and Arson in Texas. 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 FBI Criminal Justice Information Services . You used data from 1985 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: Unearthing the Connection Between Air Pollution in Houston and Arson in Texas
[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the intertwined relationship between air pollution in Houston and arson in Texas. Utilizing data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the FBI's Criminal Justice Information Services, we sought to unravel the enigmatic link that has remained elusive for decades. Our findings reveal a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.7980063 and a strikingly significant p-value of less than 0.01, covering the time span from 1985 to 2022.
The results not only shed light on the statistical association between these seemingly unrelated phenomena but also raise intriguing questions about the underlying mechanisms at play. While our endeavor initially seemed to be a shot in the dark, the data has ignited our curiosity and stoked the flames of scientific inquiry. This paper not only kindles the flame of understanding but also fans the embers of discussion about the possible implications for public policy and urban planning.
As we sift through the smokescreen of data, we invite readers to join us in this journey of discovery where the sparks of knowledge are fueled by rigorous analysis and a healthy dose of academic humor.
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The connection between air pollution and arson is not one that readily ignites scientific curiosity, yet the potential for a smoldering relationship has long been suspected. Like a pair of elusive fireflies in the dark, these two phenomena have danced around each other, their sparks threatening to set ablaze the margins of statistical significance. As researchers, we find ourselves drawn to this unconventional pairing - like moths to a flame - in a quest to unearth the hidden embers of correlation and causation.
The backdrop for our study is the sprawling metropolis of Houston, Texas, a city known for its industrial prowess and its occasional bouts of hazy skies. Intertwined with this urban landscape is the alarming frequency of arson incidents across the state of Texas, setting the stage for an inferno of questions regarding the potential relationship with air pollution. With the Environmental Protection Agency serving as our beacon in the fog of data, and the FBI's Criminal Justice Information Services acting as our watchtower, we embarked on a journey to make sense of these seemingly disparate elements.
Armed with an arsenal of statistical tools, we sought to unravel the tangled labyrinth of variables, hoping to find the smoking gun that would confirm or extinguish the suspicions surrounding the link between air quality and acts of intentional fire-setting. Much like forensic scientists inspecting the residue of a suspicious blaze, we meticulously combed through the data spanning nearly four decades, meticulously peeling back the layers of smoke and mirrors to reveal the truth hidden within the statistical ashes. The pursuit of truth is not for the faint of heart; it requires the tenacity of a determined firefighter and the precision of a meticulous arson investigator.
As we embark on this scholarly journey, we are reminded of the famous words of Robert Frost, "Some say the world will end in fire, some say in ice." But what if the world ends in a hazy plume of industrial emissions and the flicker of a match? Our quest is fueled not only by a desire to unravel the enigma of this incendiary relationship but also by a deep-seated appreciation for the unexpected discoveries that often lie dormant within data, waiting to be kindled into illuminating findings.
Join us as we venture into this complex labyrinth, armed with the torch of scientific inquiry and the shield of rigorous analysis. Together, let us navigate the smoky corridors of correlation and causation, as we strive to shed light on this curious and, dare we say, fiery connection.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
ChatGPT:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
Data Collection:
To illuminate the hazy relationship between air pollution in Houston and arson in Texas, we embarked on a data collection journey that could rival the most convoluted treasure hunt. With the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) serving as our treasure map, we extracted air quality data from various monitoring stations across Houston, where the periodic fluctuations in pollutants whispered tales of nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and volatile organic compounds. Our team scoured the internet for these nuggets of information, hoping to strike gold in the form of historical air quality measurements spanning the years 1985 to 2022. The FBI's Criminal Justice Information Services acted as our trusty companion, providing data on arson incidents across the Lone Star State, where each reported case beckoned to us with the allure of a hidden gem waiting to be unearthed.
Statistical Analysis:
With our trove of data in hand, we set out to navigate the labyrinth of statistical analysis with the assuredness of seasoned explorers and the enthusiasm of intrepid adventurers. Armed with a formidable arsenal of statistical tools, including correlation analysis, regression models, and time-series analysis, we endeavored to illuminate the potential connections between air pollutants and intentional fire-setting. Like alchemists of old, we concocted and tested hypotheses, carefully stirring the cauldron of multivariate analysis and adjusting the flames of significance levels to reveal golden insights within the smoky mist of our findings.
Correlation and Regression:
Our pursuit of enlightenment led us into the realm of correlation coefficients and regression analyses, where we sought to untangle the intricate web of relationships between variables. As we delved deeper into the statistical underbrush, our findings revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.7980063, casting a radiant glow on the potential association between air pollution and arson. The p-value, a treasure chest of statistical significance, yielded a dazzling gem of less than 0.01, further illuminating the path toward understanding the enigmatic link that had eluded scholarly scrutiny for decades. It was as if the statistical stars had aligned to guide our expedition toward a remarkably significant correlation, a discovery that could set our scientific compass spinning with excitement.
Time-Series Analysis:
Venturing further into the heart of our data, we engaged in time-series analysis, where the ebb and flow of air pollution levels danced with the rhythm of arson incidents across the Texas landscape. Like diurnal patterns in the forest, we observed the cyclical trends and seasonal fluctuations of pollutants, while the flicker of intentional fire-setting seemed to follow its own enigmatic cadence. Armed with time-series models and tools of temporal analysis, we harnessed the elusive winds of data, hoping to unravel the hidden choreography of air quality and arson on the stage of Texas over nearly four decades.
Sensitivity Analysis:
As we navigated through the uncharted territory of our findings, we conducted sensitivity analyses to test the robustness of our statistical inferences. Like cartographers verifying the accuracy of their maps, we probed the stability of our results, ensuring that the conclusions drawn from our analyses were not mere mirages amidst the statistical dunes. Our endeavor to scrutinize the dependability of our insights echoed with the fervor of explorers double-checking their navigational instruments before embarking on an odyssey into the statistical unknown.
---
Please let me know if you'd like to continue with the academic paper, or if there's anything else I can help you with.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a researcher writing an academic paper.You draft the results section of an academic research paper. You speak in the past tense (you found...).
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air pollution in Houston and Arson in Texas. 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 FBI Criminal Justice Information Services .
For the time period 1985 to 2022, you found a correlation 0.7980063, r-squared of 0.6368141, 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: Unearthing the Connection Between Air Pollution in Houston and Arson in Texas
[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the intertwined relationship between air pollution in Houston and arson in Texas. Utilizing data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the FBI's Criminal Justice Information Services, we sought to unravel the enigmatic link that has remained elusive for decades. Our findings reveal a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.7980063 and a strikingly significant p-value of less than 0.01, covering the time span from 1985 to 2022.
The results not only shed light on the statistical association between these seemingly unrelated phenomena but also raise intriguing questions about the underlying mechanisms at play. While our endeavor initially seemed to be a shot in the dark, the data has ignited our curiosity and stoked the flames of scientific inquiry. This paper not only kindles the flame of understanding but also fans the embers of discussion about the possible implications for public policy and urban planning.
As we sift through the smokescreen of data, we invite readers to join us in this journey of discovery where the sparks of knowledge are fueled by rigorous analysis and a healthy dose of academic humor.
-------
And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
The connection between air pollution and arson is not one that readily ignites scientific curiosity, yet the potential for a smoldering relationship has long been suspected. Like a pair of elusive fireflies in the dark, these two phenomena have danced around each other, their sparks threatening to set ablaze the margins of statistical significance. As researchers, we find ourselves drawn to this unconventional pairing - like moths to a flame - in a quest to unearth the hidden embers of correlation and causation.
The backdrop for our study is the sprawling metropolis of Houston, Texas, a city known for its industrial prowess and its occasional bouts of hazy skies. Intertwined with this urban landscape is the alarming frequency of arson incidents across the state of Texas, setting the stage for an inferno of questions regarding the potential relationship with air pollution. With the Environmental Protection Agency serving as our beacon in the fog of data, and the FBI's Criminal Justice Information Services acting as our watchtower, we embarked on a journey to make sense of these seemingly disparate elements.
Armed with an arsenal of statistical tools, we sought to unravel the tangled labyrinth of variables, hoping to find the smoking gun that would confirm or extinguish the suspicions surrounding the link between air quality and acts of intentional fire-setting. Much like forensic scientists inspecting the residue of a suspicious blaze, we meticulously combed through the data spanning nearly four decades, meticulously peeling back the layers of smoke and mirrors to reveal the truth hidden within the statistical ashes. The pursuit of truth is not for the faint of heart; it requires the tenacity of a determined firefighter and the precision of a meticulous arson investigator.
As we embark on this scholarly journey, we are reminded of the famous words of Robert Frost, "Some say the world will end in fire, some say in ice." But what if the world ends in a hazy plume of industrial emissions and the flicker of a match? Our quest is fueled not only by a desire to unravel the enigma of this incendiary relationship but also by a deep-seated appreciation for the unexpected discoveries that often lie dormant within data, waiting to be kindled into illuminating findings.
Join us as we venture into this complex labyrinth, armed with the torch of scientific inquiry and the shield of rigorous analysis. Together, let us navigate the smoky corridors of correlation and causation, as we strive to shed light on this curious and, dare we say, fiery connection.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[RESULTS]]
ChatGPT:
[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of the data has uncovered a striking correlation coefficient (r) of 0.7980063 between air pollution levels in Houston and incidents of arson in Texas, indicating a strong positive association between these two variables. This correlation is further supported by an r-squared value of 0.6368141, signifying that approximately 63.68% of the variance in arson incidents can be explained by variations in air pollution levels. The p-value of less than 0.01 underscores the significance of this relationship, lending additional weight to our findings. In simpler terms, there is a high likelihood that the observed association is not due to mere luck or happenstance, but rather indicative of a tangible connection between air quality and intentional fire-setting.
Fig. 1, our visually striking scatterplot, provides a compelling illustration of this substantial correlation. The scatterplot leaves little room for doubt, depicting a pattern that is consistent with the statistical measures we have procured. The data points, much like fireflies in the night, seem to converge in a manner that aligns with our calculated correlation. This visualization not only serves as a testament to the strength of the relationship discovered but also offers a captivating glimpse into the interplay of these variables.
Our results, despite igniting skepticism due to the seemingly disparate nature of the variables under investigation, have kindled a newfound understanding of the potential interdependence between air pollution and arson. The statistical evidence points to an association that is more than a mere flash in the pan, prompting intriguing questions about the underlying mechanisms fuelling this unexpected relationship. The lingering haze of uncertainty surrounding this correlation invites further investigation, as we endeavor to fan the sparks of knowledge into a fully-fledged understanding of this phenomenon.
In summary, our study has unearthed a robust correlation between air pollution in Houston and incidents of arson in Texas, highlighting the need for continued exploration into the complex interplay of environmental factors and criminal behavior. The implications of these findings extend beyond statistical significance, beckoning policymakers and urban planners to consider the potential ramifications of air quality on fire-related incidents. As we extinguish the flames of doubt with empirical evidence, we turn our attention towards the illuminating prospects for future research in this underexplored terrain of environmental criminology.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a researcher writing an academic paper.You draft the discussion section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air pollution in Houston and Arson in Texas. 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: Unearthing the Connection Between Air Pollution in Houston and Arson in Texas
[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the intertwined relationship between air pollution in Houston and arson in Texas. Utilizing data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the FBI's Criminal Justice Information Services, we sought to unravel the enigmatic link that has remained elusive for decades. Our findings reveal a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.7980063 and a strikingly significant p-value of less than 0.01, covering the time span from 1985 to 2022.
The results not only shed light on the statistical association between these seemingly unrelated phenomena but also raise intriguing questions about the underlying mechanisms at play. While our endeavor initially seemed to be a shot in the dark, the data has ignited our curiosity and stoked the flames of scientific inquiry. This paper not only kindles the flame of understanding but also fans the embers of discussion about the possible implications for public policy and urban planning.
As we sift through the smokescreen of data, we invite readers to join us in this journey of discovery where the sparks of knowledge are fueled by rigorous analysis and a healthy dose of academic humor.
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
In "The Correlation Between Air Quality and Criminal Behavior," Smith et al. explore the potential relationship between air pollution and acts of arson. Their findings indicate a moderate positive correlation between particulate matter levels in the air and the incidence of intentional fires, prompting further investigation into the mechanisms underlying this curious association.
Doe's study, "Emissions and Arson: Uncovering the Inextricable Link," delves into the intricate web of factors that may contribute to the propensity for arson in areas with high levels of air pollution. The researchers observe a statistically significant association between sulfur dioxide emissions and the likelihood of arson, presenting compelling evidence for a nuanced interplay between environmental factors and criminal behavior.
Jones et al., in "Smoke Signals: Exploring the Nexus of Air Quality and Arson," present a comprehensive analysis of ambient air pollutant concentrations and the spatial distribution of arson incidents in urban areas. Their study highlights the spatial clustering of arson events in close proximity to industrial zones with elevated levels of air pollution, raising provocative questions about the potential role of environmental exposure in incendiary acts.
Furthermore, works such as "Air Pollution and Its Effects on Houston's Urban Landscape" by Environmental Research Group and "The Arsonist's Handbook" by Jane Doe provide valuable insights into the contextual backdrop against which the relationship between air pollution in Houston and arson in Texas unfolds.
In a departure from non-fiction literature, fictional works such as "The Smoke Jumper" by Nicholas Evans and "Heat Wave" by Richard Castle offer a tantalizing glimpse into the realm of fires, albeit in a different context. While these works may not directly address the specific nexus of air pollution and arson, they serve as a reminder of the enthralling allure of fire-related narratives that continue to captivate audiences.
In a whimsically unconventional approach to literature review, the authors also draw inspiration from eclectic sources, including but not limited to grocery store receipts, fortune cookie messages, and the enigmatic musings of a fortune-telling parrot named Percy. While unconventional, these sources have ignited fresh perspectives and sparked unexpected connections, underscoring the multifaceted nature of scholarly inquiry.
As the authors sift through the voluminous body of literature on this subject, they have also gleaned insights from peculiar sources such as interpretive dance performances, cryptic graffiti messages, and the fleeting whispers of the wind. While unconventional, these unconventional sources have provided a breath of fresh air in the oftentimes dense landscape of academic research, infusing the authors' investigation with a dash of spontaneity and playfulness. After all, scholarly pursuit should not be devoid of whimsy, and sometimes the most unexpected sources yield the brightest sparks of inspiration.
[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of the data has uncovered a striking correlation coefficient (r) of 0.7980063 between air pollution levels in Houston and incidents of arson in Texas, indicating a strong positive association between these two variables. This correlation is further supported by an r-squared value of 0.6368141, signifying that approximately 63.68% of the variance in arson incidents can be explained by variations in air pollution levels. The p-value of less than 0.01 underscores the significance of this relationship, lending additional weight to our findings. In simpler terms, there is a high likelihood that the observed association is not due to mere luck or happenstance, but rather indicative of a tangible connection between air quality and intentional fire-setting.
Fig. 1, our visually striking scatterplot, provides a compelling illustration of this substantial correlation. The scatterplot leaves little room for doubt, depicting a pattern that is consistent with the statistical measures we have procured. The data points, much like fireflies in the night, seem to converge in a manner that aligns with our calculated correlation. This visualization not only serves as a testament to the strength of the relationship discovered but also offers a captivating glimpse into the interplay of these variables.
Our results, despite igniting skepticism due to the seemingly disparate nature of the variables under investigation, have kindled a newfound understanding of the potential interdependence between air pollution and arson. The statistical evidence points to an association that is more than a mere flash in the pan, prompting intriguing questions about the underlying mechanisms fuelling this unexpected relationship. The lingering haze of uncertainty surrounding this correlation invites further investigation, as we endeavor to fan the sparks of knowledge into a fully-fledged understanding of this phenomenon.
In summary, our study has unearthed a robust correlation between air pollution in Houston and incidents of arson in Texas, highlighting the need for continued exploration into the complex interplay of environmental factors and criminal behavior. The implications of these findings extend beyond statistical significance, beckoning policymakers and urban planners to consider the potential ramifications of air quality on fire-related incidents. As we extinguish the flames of doubt with empirical evidence, we turn our attention towards the illuminating prospects for future research in this underexplored terrain of environmental criminology.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[DISCUSSION]]
ChatGPT:
[[DISCUSSION]]
The results of our study clearly lend weight to the prior research in this field. Smith et al.'s exploration of the correlation between air quality and criminal behavior has indeed found support in our findings. It appears that the sparks of curiosity they ignited have now grown into a full-fledged bonfire of evidence. Similarly, Doe's study on emissions and arson has not gone up in smoke; instead, our results have fanned the flames of their research, providing further corroboration for the intricate web of factors they delineated. It is safe to say that we are not merely blowing hot air when we assert that the statistical relationship uncovered aligns with the existing body of scholarly work.
In our literature review, we took a whimsically unconventional approach in drawing inspiration from eclectic sources, which, tongue-in-cheek as it may seem, has ultimately yielded fresh perspectives and sparked unexpected connections, much like a fortuitous encounter with a compelling metaphorical kindling. These unconventional sources have indeed provided a breath of fresh air in the dense landscape of academic research, fueling our investigation with an element of spontaneity and playfulness. As we brush aside the ashes of skepticism, we find ourselves galvanized by the fact that this unexpected statistical association has indeed caught fire.
The statistical evidence we have amassed, while initially causing raised eyebrows due to the seeming disparity of the variables under scrutiny, has illuminated a potential interdependence between air pollution and arson. The picture painted by our analysis is not one of smoke and mirrors; rather, it reveals a robust and tangible link, effectively shining a spotlight on the incendiary relationship between air quality and fire-related incidents. Our results are not mere statistical blazes; they are a testament to the ardent connections between the variables at hand.
In conclusion (no pun intended, or maybe just one fiery pun), our study has cast light on the substantial correlation between air pollution in Houston and incidents of arson in Texas, serving as a clarion call for further exploration into the intricate interplay of environmental factors and criminal behavior. As we stoke the flames of knowledge and understanding, we hope that the heat of our findings will thaw the frozen ground of conventional wisdom, igniting fresh perspectives and inspiring future research in this fiery field. Let us continue to fan the flames of curiosity and inquiry, as we set our sights on extinguishing the lingering haze of uncertainty that surrounds this captivating relationship.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a researcher writing an academic paper.You draft the discussion section of goofy academic research papers that sounds like it belongs based on the title and abstract provided.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air pollution in Houston and Arson in Texas. 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: Unearthing the Connection Between Air Pollution in Houston and Arson in Texas
[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the intertwined relationship between air pollution in Houston and arson in Texas. Utilizing data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the FBI's Criminal Justice Information Services, we sought to unravel the enigmatic link that has remained elusive for decades. Our findings reveal a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.7980063 and a strikingly significant p-value of less than 0.01, covering the time span from 1985 to 2022.
The results not only shed light on the statistical association between these seemingly unrelated phenomena but also raise intriguing questions about the underlying mechanisms at play. While our endeavor initially seemed to be a shot in the dark, the data has ignited our curiosity and stoked the flames of scientific inquiry. This paper not only kindles the flame of understanding but also fans the embers of discussion about the possible implications for public policy and urban planning.
As we sift through the smokescreen of data, we invite readers to join us in this journey of discovery where the sparks of knowledge are fueled by rigorous analysis and a healthy dose of academic humor.
[[INTRDUCTION]]
The connection between air pollution and arson is not one that readily ignites scientific curiosity, yet the potential for a smoldering relationship has long been suspected. Like a pair of elusive fireflies in the dark, these two phenomena have danced around each other, their sparks threatening to set ablaze the margins of statistical significance. As researchers, we find ourselves drawn to this unconventional pairing - like moths to a flame - in a quest to unearth the hidden embers of correlation and causation.
The backdrop for our study is the sprawling metropolis of Houston, Texas, a city known for its industrial prowess and its occasional bouts of hazy skies. Intertwined with this urban landscape is the alarming frequency of arson incidents across the state of Texas, setting the stage for an inferno of questions regarding the potential relationship with air pollution. With the Environmental Protection Agency serving as our beacon in the fog of data, and the FBI's Criminal Justice Information Services acting as our watchtower, we embarked on a journey to make sense of these seemingly disparate elements.
Armed with an arsenal of statistical tools, we sought to unravel the tangled labyrinth of variables, hoping to find the smoking gun that would confirm or extinguish the suspicions surrounding the link between air quality and acts of intentional fire-setting. Much like forensic scientists inspecting the residue of a suspicious blaze, we meticulously combed through the data spanning nearly four decades, meticulously peeling back the layers of smoke and mirrors to reveal the truth hidden within the statistical ashes. The pursuit of truth is not for the faint of heart; it requires the tenacity of a determined firefighter and the precision of a meticulous arson investigator.
As we embark on this scholarly journey, we are reminded of the famous words of Robert Frost, "Some say the world will end in fire, some say in ice." But what if the world ends in a hazy plume of industrial emissions and the flicker of a match? Our quest is fueled not only by a desire to unravel the enigma of this incendiary relationship but also by a deep-seated appreciation for the unexpected discoveries that often lie dormant within data, waiting to be kindled into illuminating findings.
Join us as we venture into this complex labyrinth, armed with the torch of scientific inquiry and the shield of rigorous analysis. Together, let us navigate the smoky corridors of correlation and causation, as we strive to shed light on this curious and, dare we say, fiery connection.
[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of the data has uncovered a striking correlation coefficient (r) of 0.7980063 between air pollution levels in Houston and incidents of arson in Texas, indicating a strong positive association between these two variables. This correlation is further supported by an r-squared value of 0.6368141, signifying that approximately 63.68% of the variance in arson incidents can be explained by variations in air pollution levels. The p-value of less than 0.01 underscores the significance of this relationship, lending additional weight to our findings. In simpler terms, there is a high likelihood that the observed association is not due to mere luck or happenstance, but rather indicative of a tangible connection between air quality and intentional fire-setting.
Fig. 1, our visually striking scatterplot, provides a compelling illustration of this substantial correlation. The scatterplot leaves little room for doubt, depicting a pattern that is consistent with the statistical measures we have procured. The data points, much like fireflies in the night, seem to converge in a manner that aligns with our calculated correlation. This visualization not only serves as a testament to the strength of the relationship discovered but also offers a captivating glimpse into the interplay of these variables.
Our results, despite igniting skepticism due to the seemingly disparate nature of the variables under investigation, have kindled a newfound understanding of the potential interdependence between air pollution and arson. The statistical evidence points to an association that is more than a mere flash in the pan, prompting intriguing questions about the underlying mechanisms fuelling this unexpected relationship. The lingering haze of uncertainty surrounding this correlation invites further investigation, as we endeavor to fan the sparks of knowledge into a fully-fledged understanding of this phenomenon.
In summary, our study has unearthed a robust correlation between air pollution in Houston and incidents of arson in Texas, highlighting the need for continued exploration into the complex interplay of environmental factors and criminal behavior. The implications of these findings extend beyond statistical significance, beckoning policymakers and urban planners to consider the potential ramifications of air quality on fire-related incidents. As we extinguish the flames of doubt with empirical evidence, we turn our attention towards the illuminating prospects for future research in this underexplored terrain of environmental criminology.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[CONCLUSION]]
ChatGPT:
[[CONCLUSION]]
In drawing a curtain on this blazing inquiry, our findings not only fan the flames of curiosity but also spark a chuckle at the unexpected connection between air pollution and arson. The statistical pyrotechnics we've uncovered leave little room for doubt about the robust correlation between these seemingly unrelated variables. Much like a firework show, our analysis has lit up the night sky of academic research, shedding light on the smoldering association between environmental factors and criminal behavior.
As we snuff out the last remaining embers of doubt, it becomes clear that further research in this area would be akin to fanning the flames of redundancy. To borrow a phrase from the world of puns, it seems we've already burned the midnight oil on this topic. Therefore, we assert with confidence that no more research is needed in this smoky domain of environmental criminology.
With that said, it's time for us to put out the fire and turn our attention towards other illuminating prospects for future research. After all, as scientists, we must always remain vigilant in our quest to ignite new lines of inquiry and to keep the flames of discovery burning bright.
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: Unearthing the Connection Between Air Pollution in Houston and Arson in Texas. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.
ChatGPT:
Journal of Ecological Epidemiology
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: Unearthing the Connection Between Air Pollution in Houston and Arson in Texas. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.
ChatGPT:
The Institute for Environmental Criminology and Atmospheric Chemistry
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: Unearthing the Connection Between Air Pollution in Houston and Arson in Texas with an abstract of This study delves into the intertwined relationship between air pollution in Houston and arson in Texas. Utilizing data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the FBI's Criminal Justice Information Services, we sought to unravel the enigmatic link that has remained elusive for decades. Our findings reveal a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.7980063 and a strikingly significant p-value of less than 0.01, covering the time span from 1985 to 2022.
The results not only shed light on the statistical association between these seemingly unrelated phenomena but also raise intriguing questions about the underlying mechanisms at play. While our endeavor initially seemed to be a shot in the dark, the data has ignited our curiosity and stoked the flames of scientific inquiry. This paper not only kindles the flame of understanding but also fans the embers of discussion about the possible implications for public policy and urban planning.
As we sift through the smokescreen of data, we invite readers to join us in this journey of discovery where the sparks of knowledge are fueled by rigorous analysis and a healthy dose of academic humor.
ChatGPT:
air pollution, Houston, arson, Texas, environmental protection agency, EPA, FBI, criminal justice information services, correlation coefficient, statistical association, public policy, urban planning, data analysis, scientific inquiry
*There is a bunch of Python happening behind the scenes to turn this prompt sequence into a PDF.
Discover a new correlation
View all correlations
View all research papers
Report an error
Data details
Air pollution in HoustonDetailed data title: Percentage of days with air quality at 'unhealthy for sensitive groups' or worse in Houston-The Woodlands-Sugar Land, TX
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
See what else correlates with Air pollution in Houston
Arson in Texas
Detailed data title: The arson rate per 100,000 residents in Texas
Source: FBI Criminal Justice Information Services
See what else correlates with Arson in Texas
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 = 0.6368141 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 63.7% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Arson in Texas) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Air pollution in Houston) over the 38 years from 1985 through 2022.
p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 2.0E-9. 0.0000000019714578612844474000
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 0.8 in 2.0E-7% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 507,238,841 random variables You don't actually need 507 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 37 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 37 because we have two variables measured over a period of 38 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.
[ 0.64, 0.89 ] 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.
1985 | 1986 | 1987 | 1988 | 1989 | 1990 | 1991 | 1992 | 1993 | 1994 | 1995 | 1996 | 1997 | 1998 | 1999 | 2000 | 2001 | 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | |
Air pollution in Houston (Bad air quality days) | 32.3288 | 29.3151 | 31.7808 | 33.6066 | 20.274 | 25.4795 | 21.0959 | 17.7596 | 16.9863 | 23.5616 | 27.9452 | 16.6667 | 22.7397 | 24.6575 | 27.3973 | 24.0437 | 23.2877 | 18.9041 | 21.3699 | 20.2186 | 27.8237 | 21.6438 | 15.0685 | 12.6027 | 8.76712 | 12.0548 | 15.6164 | 13.1148 | 6.57534 | 3.83562 | 12.3288 | 6.28415 | 6.84932 | 9.58904 | 8.49315 | 6.55738 | 8.21918 | 10.6849 |
Arson in Texas (Arson rate) | 50 | 53.8 | 50.7 | 56.2 | 57.9 | 58.1 | 57.9 | 55.1 | 56.1 | 53.7 | 50.7 | 52.8 | 45.2 | 42.9 | 42.2 | 39.5 | 39.5 | 38.1 | 34.7 | 29.7 | 29.6 | 27.8 | 24.7 | 26 | 24.2 | 21.9 | 19.7 | 17 | 14.9 | 14.2 | 12.9 | 12.6 | 11.7 | 9.4 | 8.5 | 10.2 | 10 | 9.7 |
Why this works
- 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.
- 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. - 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.
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([32.3288,29.3151,31.7808,33.6066,20.274,25.4795,21.0959,17.7596,16.9863,23.5616,27.9452,16.6667,22.7397,24.6575,27.3973,24.0437,23.2877,18.9041,21.3699,20.2186,27.8237,21.6438,15.0685,12.6027,8.76712,12.0548,15.6164,13.1148,6.57534,3.83562,12.3288,6.28415,6.84932,9.58904,8.49315,6.55738,8.21918,10.6849,])
array_2 = np.array([50,53.8,50.7,56.2,57.9,58.1,57.9,55.1,56.1,53.7,50.7,52.8,45.2,42.9,42.2,39.5,39.5,38.1,34.7,29.7,29.6,27.8,24.7,26,24.2,21.9,19.7,17,14.9,14.2,12.9,12.6,11.7,9.4,8.5,10.2,10,9.7,])
array_1_name = "Air pollution in Houston"
array_2_name = "Arson in Texas"
# 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:
- High resolution line chart
The image linked here is a Scalable Vector Graphic (SVG). It is the highest resolution that is possible to achieve. It scales up beyond the size of the observable universe without pixelating. You do not need to email me asking if I have a higher resolution image. I do not. The physical limitations of our universe prevent me from providing you with an image that is any higher resolution than this one.
If you insert it into a PowerPoint presentation (a tool well-known for managing things that are the scale of the universe), you can right-click > "Ungroup" or "Create Shape" and then edit the lines and text directly. You can also change the colors this way.
Alternatively you can use a tool like Inkscape. - High resolution line chart, optimized for mobile
- Alternative high resolution line chart
- Scatterplot
- Portable line chart (png)
- Portable line chart (png), optimized for mobile
- Line chart for only Air pollution in Houston
- Line chart for only Arson in Texas
- AI-generated correlation image
- The spurious research paper: Up in Smoke: Unearthing the Connection Between Air Pollution in Houston and Arson in Texas
Hats off to you for rating!
Correlation ID: 2999 · Black Variable ID: 20721 · Red Variable ID: 20072