Spurious correlation #3,206 · View random
A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Popularity of the first name Jaime and the second variable is Air pollution in Reading, Pennsylvania. The chart goes from 1980 to 2022, and the two variables track closely in value over that time.

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Popularity of the first name Jaime and the second variable is Air pollution in Reading, Pennsylvania. The chart goes from 1980 to 2022, and the two variables track closely in value over that time.

Download png, svg

AI explanation

As the number of babies named Jaime declined, there were fewer cars with personalized "Jaime on board" bumper stickers on the roads, leading to a decrease in traffic congestion and ultimately lower air pollution in Reading, Pennsylvania. Remember, sometimes a name can have an exhaust-ing impact on the environment!

^{Show image generation prompt} Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Prompt: Generate an image of the cybernetic art style, featuring a clear and pristine blue sky above Reading, Pennsylvania. In the sky, the name "Jaime" is written in bold, white letters, slowly dissipating. There is a decrease in the presence of skywriting planes, indicating the declining popularity of the name. Show the air quality to be clean and free from usual airplane emissions, resulting in reduced air pollution. 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: Popularity of the first name Jaime and Air pollution in Reading, Pennsylvania. 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: Voxel art Photorealism Cybernetic art A scene from Skyrim Cybernetic art
ChatGPT: Cybernetic art

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 Popularity of the first name Jaime and Air pollution in Reading, Pennsylvania, in the following situation: Because as the popularity of the name Jaime decreased, fewer people felt the need to spell it out in the sky using skywriting planes, leading to a decrease in air pollution from airplane emissions in Reading, Pennsylvania.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: We see the sky above Reading, Pennsylvania, with a clear and pristine blue backdrop. In the sky, the name "Jaime" is written in bold, white letters, slowly dissipating. There is a noticeable decrease in the presence of skywriting planes, indicating the declining popularity of the name. Significantly, the air is clean and free from the usual airplane emissions, resulting in reduced air pollution.

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: [ Cybernetic art ] and depicting this scene: We see the sky above Reading, Pennsylvania, with a clear and pristine blue backdrop. In the sky, the name "Jaime" is written in bold, white letters, slowly dissipating. There is a noticeable decrease in the presence of skywriting planes, indicating the declining popularity of the name. Significantly, the air is clean and free from the usual airplane emissions, resulting in reduced air pollution. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Prompt: Generate an image of the cybernetic art style, featuring a clear and pristine blue sky above Reading, Pennsylvania. In the sky, the name "Jaime" is written in bold, white letters, slowly dissipating. There is a decrease in the presence of skywriting planes, indicating the declining popularity of the name. Show the air quality to be clean and free from usual airplane emissions, resulting in reduced air pollution.

*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.
^{Show prompt for explanation} 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 Popularity of the first name Jaime caused Air pollution in Reading, Pennsylvania to decrease. Add a funny one-liner at the end.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)

Jaime's Fame and Reading's Air - A Whiff of Name Popularity and Pollution in Pennsylvania

The Journal of Quirky Sociological Studies

Jan 2024

Reminder: This paper is AI-generated. Not real!

^{Show prompt used to generate this paper} 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 goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.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 Popularity of the first name Jaime and Air pollution in Reading, Pennsylvania. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

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

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

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then name some movies that you watched that are tangentially related to the topic.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Jaime's Fame and Reading's Air - A Whiff of Name Popularity and Pollution in Pennsylvania"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this research, we explore the intriguing and slightly quirky relationship between the popularity of the first name Jaime and air pollution levels in the charming city of Reading, Pennsylvania. Despite eye-rolling skepticism, we approached this investigation with scientific rigor, leaving no stone unturned in our quest for understanding. Utilizing data from the US Social Security Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency, we embarked on a journey that would make even the most seasoned statistics enthusiast raise an amused eyebrow.

Our findings revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.8468125 and p < 0.01, spanning the years 1980 to 2022, indicating a surprisingly strong link between the frequency of the name Jaime and air pollution levels in Reading, Pennsylvania. While this correlation may seem as unlikely as finding a needle in a haystack, our results left us "Jaimeing" with excitement. It's undeniable that this connection has implications that reach beyond mere amusement, potentially shedding light on a previously unexplored facet of environmental and sociological phenomena.

As we peel back the layers of this curious onion, we invite readers to join us in our investigation, to witness the fusion of statistical analysis and whimsy, and to perhaps share a chuckle at the unexpected synergy of names and noxious fumes. After all, what's a research paper without a little "dad joke" to clear the air?

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The debate over the impact of air pollution on public health and the environment has been a hot topic for decades, but it seems we may have neglected an unexpected contender in this arena: the popularity of the first name Jaime. Now, while this might sound like a punchline waiting to happen, our research aims to put a serious spin on this peculiar correlation and uncover whether there's more to the name than meets the eye. After all, who knew that pollution and puns could go hand in hand?
Before delving into the nitty-gritty statistical analysis, it's important to air out the rationale behind this seemingly unconventional investigation. One might wonder, "What's in a name?" Well, we're here to find out if the name Jaime carries a faint whiff of influence on the air quality in Reading, Pennsylvania, or if it's simply a case of statistical tomfoolery. Don't worry, we promise not to "g(a)sk" for forgiveness for this pun – it's just too "air-resistible."
As researchers, we understand that the interplay between personal identifiers and environmental factors may raise more than a few eyebrows. However, as the saying goes, "Don't judge a book by its cover" – or in this case, a research paper by its whimsical premise. We're here to challenge assumptions, dig deeper than a mole in a coal mine, and, if all else fails, entertain our readers with a "punny" quip or two along the way. So grab your oxygen masks, because we're about to embark on a journey that's as illuminating as it is unexpected.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The relationship between personal names and environmental conditions has been an area of limited exploration in scientific literature. However, the authors find that recent studies have begun to shed light on the potential influence of names on ecological factors. In "Surnames and the Weather," Smith et al. delve into the impact of surnames on weather patterns, offering a glimpse into the curious interplay between nomenclature and nature.

Now, you may be wondering if we've taken leave of our senses by proposing a connection between a first name and air pollution. Rest assured, we are navigating these uncharted waters with a paddle of skepticism and a compass of statistical rigor. After all, what's a research study without a little whimsy to lighten the load?

In "Names and Numbers," Doe tackles the overlooked significance of given names in shaping societal trends. From the rise and fall of baby names to the unexpected correlations between names and socioeconomic indicators, Doe's work provides a compelling backdrop for our investigation. Just remember, correlation does not always imply causation, but it sure makes for a fascinating discussion at cocktail parties.

But let's not forget the literary world, where the likes of "The Air-ness of Being" by Ipsum and "Pollution Puns: A Playful Paradox" by Lorem offer thought-provoking insights into the tangled web of air quality and nomenclature. As we delve into the realm of fiction, we can't help but ponder the potential for a novel titled "The Name Games: A Tale of Toxic Hilarity" to capture the essence of our research endeavor.

On the silver screen, movies like "All About Eve-olution" and "Gone with the Wind, but Not the Smog" provide anecdotal references to the intersection of human identity and environmental conditions. While these may not be documentaries per se, they certainly add a dash of cinematic flair to our exploration of the whimsical and unexpected.

In the world of academia, it's not often that researchers get to journey through uncharted territory while making pit stops for puns and punchlines. But as the old saying goes, "If you can't take a little air pollution humor, maybe you need to let it ventilate a bit."

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.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 Popularity of the first name Jaime and Air pollution in Reading, Pennsylvania. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from US Social Security Administration and Environmental Protection Agency . You used data from 1980 to 2022

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

Here is the title, abstract, and introduction of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Jaime's Fame and Reading's Air - A Whiff of Name Popularity and Pollution in Pennsylvania"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this research, we explore the intriguing and slightly quirky relationship between the popularity of the first name Jaime and air pollution levels in the charming city of Reading, Pennsylvania. Despite eye-rolling skepticism, we approached this investigation with scientific rigor, leaving no stone unturned in our quest for understanding. Utilizing data from the US Social Security Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency, we embarked on a journey that would make even the most seasoned statistics enthusiast raise an amused eyebrow.

Our findings revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.8468125 and p < 0.01, spanning the years 1980 to 2022, indicating a surprisingly strong link between the frequency of the name Jaime and air pollution levels in Reading, Pennsylvania. While this correlation may seem as unlikely as finding a needle in a haystack, our results left us "Jaimeing" with excitement. It's undeniable that this connection has implications that reach beyond mere amusement, potentially shedding light on a previously unexplored facet of environmental and sociological phenomena.

As we peel back the layers of this curious onion, we invite readers to join us in our investigation, to witness the fusion of statistical analysis and whimsy, and to perhaps share a chuckle at the unexpected synergy of names and noxious fumes. After all, what's a research paper without a little "dad joke" to clear the air?

[[INTRODUCTION]]
The debate over the impact of air pollution on public health and the environment has been a hot topic for decades, but it seems we may have neglected an unexpected contender in this arena: the popularity of the first name Jaime. Now, while this might sound like a punchline waiting to happen, our research aims to put a serious spin on this peculiar correlation and uncover whether there's more to the name than meets the eye. After all, who knew that pollution and puns could go hand in hand?
Before delving into the nitty-gritty statistical analysis, it's important to air out the rationale behind this seemingly unconventional investigation. One might wonder, "What's in a name?" Well, we're here to find out if the name Jaime carries a faint whiff of influence on the air quality in Reading, Pennsylvania, or if it's simply a case of statistical tomfoolery. Don't worry, we promise not to "g(a)sk" for forgiveness for this pun – it's just too "air-resistible."
As researchers, we understand that the interplay between personal identifiers and environmental factors may raise more than a few eyebrows. However, as the saying goes, "Don't judge a book by its cover" – or in this case, a research paper by its whimsical premise. We're here to challenge assumptions, dig deeper than a mole in a coal mine, and, if all else fails, entertain our readers with a "punny" quip or two along the way. So grab your oxygen masks, because we're about to embark on a journey that's as illuminating as it is unexpected.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To boldly go where no researcher has gone before, we meticulously crafted a methodology that would allow us to capture the enigmatic relationship between the popularity of the first name Jaime and air pollution in Reading, Pennsylvania. Our data collection journey began with an exploration of the US Social Security Administration's archives, where we combed through decades of birth records with the precision of a name-hungry sleuth. Trust us, sifting through databases may not sound thrilling, but with each Jaime we found, we couldn't help but "name it a day" and celebrate with our very own mini fiesta.

Once we had our treasure trove of Jaime data in hand, we turned our attention to the Environmental Protection Agency's repository of air quality measurements in Reading, Pennsylvania. Armed with spreadsheets and an indomitable spirit, we dived into a sea of pollutant levels, determined to uncover any flicker of correlation that might be hiding in the smog. It was a bit like looking for a needle in a haystack, but we didn't mind – after all, who doesn't love a challenge that's as "airy" as it is noble?

With our datasets in tow, we then summoned the forces of statistical wizardry to weave our web of analysis. We employed a sophisticated combination of linear regression models, time series analysis, and a sprinkle of magic dust (okay, maybe just a touch of Python programming) to unveil the intricate dance between the ebb and flow of Jaime's popularity and the ebb and flow of air pollution levels. It was a bit like watching a tango between numbers and nuance, and we couldn't help but feel a little "pollu-giddy" about the whole affair.

Now, here's where we get serious – well, as serious as one can get when they're knee-deep in datasets and dad jokes. We employed rigorous statistical tests to determine the strength and significance of the relationship between Jaime's fame and Reading's air quality. We calculated correlation coefficients with the fervor of a math maestro, and when the results started to align like stars in the night sky, we couldn't help but "name-drop" the significance levels like we were sharing the latest gossip.

To ensure the robustness of our findings, we also conducted sensitivity analyses, scrutinizing our models with the ferocity of a truth-seeking terrier. We challenged our assumptions, twisted our variables like a Rubik's cube, and – dare I say it – even held a séance or two with the statistical ghosts of research past. It was an adventure fit for a daring explorer, and as the dust settled (or in this case, the air pollutants), our analytical methods stood as steadfast as a lighthouse in a storm.

In the spirit of transparency and whimsy, we also performed a series of "stress tests" on our analysis, pushing the boundaries of our models to see how they held up under the weight of scrutiny. Just like stress-relief squishy toys, our models bounced back with resilience, proving that they were as steadfast as a Jaime in a sea of Joes. And with that, we present to you the culmination of our daring escapade – a methodology peppered with levity, rigor, and a sprinkle of statistical stardust, all in pursuit of unraveling the curious nexus of Jaime's fame and Reading's air quality.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.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 Popularity of the first name Jaime and Air pollution in Reading, Pennsylvania. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from US Social Security Administration and Environmental Protection Agency .

For the time period 1980 to 2022, you found a correlation 0.8468125, r-squared of 0.7170914, 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]]
"Jaime's Fame and Reading's Air - A Whiff of Name Popularity and Pollution in Pennsylvania"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this research, we explore the intriguing and slightly quirky relationship between the popularity of the first name Jaime and air pollution levels in the charming city of Reading, Pennsylvania. Despite eye-rolling skepticism, we approached this investigation with scientific rigor, leaving no stone unturned in our quest for understanding. Utilizing data from the US Social Security Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency, we embarked on a journey that would make even the most seasoned statistics enthusiast raise an amused eyebrow.

Our findings revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.8468125 and p < 0.01, spanning the years 1980 to 2022, indicating a surprisingly strong link between the frequency of the name Jaime and air pollution levels in Reading, Pennsylvania. While this correlation may seem as unlikely as finding a needle in a haystack, our results left us "Jaimeing" with excitement. It's undeniable that this connection has implications that reach beyond mere amusement, potentially shedding light on a previously unexplored facet of environmental and sociological phenomena.

As we peel back the layers of this curious onion, we invite readers to join us in our investigation, to witness the fusion of statistical analysis and whimsy, and to perhaps share a chuckle at the unexpected synergy of names and noxious fumes. After all, what's a research paper without a little "dad joke" to clear the air?

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
The debate over the impact of air pollution on public health and the environment has been a hot topic for decades, but it seems we may have neglected an unexpected contender in this arena: the popularity of the first name Jaime. Now, while this might sound like a punchline waiting to happen, our research aims to put a serious spin on this peculiar correlation and uncover whether there's more to the name than meets the eye. After all, who knew that pollution and puns could go hand in hand?
Before delving into the nitty-gritty statistical analysis, it's important to air out the rationale behind this seemingly unconventional investigation. One might wonder, "What's in a name?" Well, we're here to find out if the name Jaime carries a faint whiff of influence on the air quality in Reading, Pennsylvania, or if it's simply a case of statistical tomfoolery. Don't worry, we promise not to "g(a)sk" for forgiveness for this pun – it's just too "air-resistible."
As researchers, we understand that the interplay between personal identifiers and environmental factors may raise more than a few eyebrows. However, as the saying goes, "Don't judge a book by its cover" – or in this case, a research paper by its whimsical premise. We're here to challenge assumptions, dig deeper than a mole in a coal mine, and, if all else fails, entertain our readers with a "punny" quip or two along the way. So grab your oxygen masks, because we're about to embark on a journey that's as illuminating as it is unexpected.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]

ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The statistical analysis of the data collected from the US Social Security Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency revealed a positively eye-popping correlation coefficient of 0.8468125 between the popularity of the first name Jaime and air pollution levels in Reading, Pennsylvania from 1980 to 2022. This strong correlation suggests that there may indeed be something more than just fresh air at play here, and it leaves us pondering the question: Is there a "Jaime-d" connection between the name Jaime and the air quality in Reading, Pennsylvania, or is this all just a statistical fluke?

In the famous words of the dad joke enthusiast, "You can't run from pollution forever... but you can name it!" We couldn't resist slipping in a name-related dad joke, and we hope it brings a breath of fresh air to this rather unusual topic.

The scatterplot (Fig. 1) graphically illustrates the striking relationship between the frequency of the name Jaime and air pollution levels in Reading, Pennsylvania. The line of best fit is as clear as an unpolluted blue sky, demonstrating the remarkable coherence between these seemingly unrelated variables.

As we digest these findings, it's hard not to appreciate the unexpectedly intriguing nature of this correlation. It's like finding out that a "breath of fresh air" can also be associated with the name Jaime - pun definitely intended. We hope this discovery adds a bit of levity to the scientific discourse and encourages others to approach their own research with an open mind and a touch of humor.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.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 Popularity of the first name Jaime and Air pollution in Reading, Pennsylvania. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

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]]
"Jaime's Fame and Reading's Air - A Whiff of Name Popularity and Pollution in Pennsylvania"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this research, we explore the intriguing and slightly quirky relationship between the popularity of the first name Jaime and air pollution levels in the charming city of Reading, Pennsylvania. Despite eye-rolling skepticism, we approached this investigation with scientific rigor, leaving no stone unturned in our quest for understanding. Utilizing data from the US Social Security Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency, we embarked on a journey that would make even the most seasoned statistics enthusiast raise an amused eyebrow.

Our findings revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.8468125 and p < 0.01, spanning the years 1980 to 2022, indicating a surprisingly strong link between the frequency of the name Jaime and air pollution levels in Reading, Pennsylvania. While this correlation may seem as unlikely as finding a needle in a haystack, our results left us "Jaimeing" with excitement. It's undeniable that this connection has implications that reach beyond mere amusement, potentially shedding light on a previously unexplored facet of environmental and sociological phenomena.

As we peel back the layers of this curious onion, we invite readers to join us in our investigation, to witness the fusion of statistical analysis and whimsy, and to perhaps share a chuckle at the unexpected synergy of names and noxious fumes. After all, what's a research paper without a little "dad joke" to clear the air?

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The relationship between personal names and environmental conditions has been an area of limited exploration in scientific literature. However, the authors find that recent studies have begun to shed light on the potential influence of names on ecological factors. In "Surnames and the Weather," Smith et al. delve into the impact of surnames on weather patterns, offering a glimpse into the curious interplay between nomenclature and nature.
Now, you may be wondering if we've taken leave of our senses by proposing a connection between a first name and air pollution. Rest assured, we are navigating these uncharted waters with a paddle of skepticism and a compass of statistical rigor. After all, what's a research study without a little whimsy to lighten the load?
In "Names and Numbers," Doe tackles the overlooked significance of given names in shaping societal trends. From the rise and fall of baby names to the unexpected correlations between names and socioeconomic indicators, Doe's work provides a compelling backdrop for our investigation. Just remember, correlation does not always imply causation, but it sure makes for a fascinating discussion at cocktail parties.
But let's not forget the literary world, where the likes of "The Air-ness of Being" by Ipsum and "Pollution Puns: A Playful Paradox" by Lorem offer thought-provoking insights into the tangled web of air quality and nomenclature. As we delve into the realm of fiction, we can't help but ponder the potential for a novel titled "The Name Games: A Tale of Toxic Hilarity" to capture the essence of our research endeavor.
On the silver screen, movies like "All About Eve-olution" and "Gone with the Wind, but Not the Smog" provide anecdotal references to the intersection of human identity and environmental conditions. While these may not be documentaries per se, they certainly add a dash of cinematic flair to our exploration of the whimsical and unexpected.
In the world of academia, it's not often that researchers get to journey through uncharted territory while making pit stops for puns and punchlines. But as the old saying goes, "If you can't take a little air pollution humor, maybe you need to let it ventilate a bit."

[[RESULTS]]
The statistical analysis of the data collected from the US Social Security Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency revealed a positively eye-popping correlation coefficient of 0.8468125 between the popularity of the first name Jaime and air pollution levels in Reading, Pennsylvania from 1980 to 2022. This strong correlation suggests that there may indeed be something more than just fresh air at play here, and it leaves us pondering the question: Is there a "Jaime-d" connection between the name Jaime and the air quality in Reading, Pennsylvania, or is this all just a statistical fluke?
In the famous words of the dad joke enthusiast, "You can't run from pollution forever... but you can name it!" We couldn't resist slipping in a name-related dad joke, and we hope it brings a breath of fresh air to this rather unusual topic.
The scatterplot (Fig. 1) graphically illustrates the striking relationship between the frequency of the name Jaime and air pollution levels in Reading, Pennsylvania. The line of best fit is as clear as an unpolluted blue sky, demonstrating the remarkable coherence between these seemingly unrelated variables.
As we digest these findings, it's hard not to appreciate the unexpectedly intriguing nature of this correlation. It's like finding out that a "breath of fresh air" can also be associated with the name Jaime - pun definitely intended. We hope this discovery adds a bit of levity to the scientific discourse and encourages others to approach their own research with an open mind and a touch of humor.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Our results provide compelling evidence of a robust correlation between the popularity of the first name Jaime and air pollution levels in Reading, Pennsylvania. The pronounced positive correlation coefficient of 0.8468125, with statistical significance at p < 0.01, aligns with prior research that has begun to explore the influence of names on ecological factors. While it may sound like a "Jaime" of a stretch, these findings support the notion that there's more than just a "nose" of truth to the connection between nomenclature and nature.

Taking a cue from earlier studies investigating the impact of surnames on weather patterns, our work adds a whimsical twist to the growing body of literature exploring the relationship between personal names and environmental conditions. As we "breeze" through these uncharted waters, we can't help but appreciate the interconnectedness between seemingly unrelated phenomena. It's almost like a breath of "fresh heir," if you will.

Our results also echo the work of Doe, who spotlighted the overlooked significance of given names in shaping societal trends. While correlation doesn't imply causation, the pronounced link we uncovered certainly makes for a captivating discussion, and perhaps even a lighthearted "dad joke" at the next academic soirée.

The striking coherence illustrated in the scatterplot, akin to a pristine blue sky, underscores the compelling fusion of statistical analysis and whimsy in our investigation. It's as if the data is "pollution" a connection between the name Jaime and air quality, leaving us "Jaimeing" with excitement at the unexpected nature of this finding. You could say it's a "breath of Jaime air."

As we embark on this unexpected journey through the corridors of unconventional research, we invite fellow academics to embrace our findings with an open mind and a dash of humor. After all, in the words of the famed dad joke enthusiast, "What do you call a polluted Jedi? Luka Sulfur." We hope this work encourages a "refreshing" perspective on the intersection of names and environmental phenomena, providing an "air" of levity in the scientific discourse.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.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 Popularity of the first name Jaime and Air pollution in Reading, Pennsylvania. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

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]]
"Jaime's Fame and Reading's Air - A Whiff of Name Popularity and Pollution in Pennsylvania"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this research, we explore the intriguing and slightly quirky relationship between the popularity of the first name Jaime and air pollution levels in the charming city of Reading, Pennsylvania. Despite eye-rolling skepticism, we approached this investigation with scientific rigor, leaving no stone unturned in our quest for understanding. Utilizing data from the US Social Security Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency, we embarked on a journey that would make even the most seasoned statistics enthusiast raise an amused eyebrow.

Our findings revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.8468125 and p < 0.01, spanning the years 1980 to 2022, indicating a surprisingly strong link between the frequency of the name Jaime and air pollution levels in Reading, Pennsylvania. While this correlation may seem as unlikely as finding a needle in a haystack, our results left us "Jaimeing" with excitement. It's undeniable that this connection has implications that reach beyond mere amusement, potentially shedding light on a previously unexplored facet of environmental and sociological phenomena.

As we peel back the layers of this curious onion, we invite readers to join us in our investigation, to witness the fusion of statistical analysis and whimsy, and to perhaps share a chuckle at the unexpected synergy of names and noxious fumes. After all, what's a research paper without a little "dad joke" to clear the air?

[[INTRDUCTION]]
The debate over the impact of air pollution on public health and the environment has been a hot topic for decades, but it seems we may have neglected an unexpected contender in this arena: the popularity of the first name Jaime. Now, while this might sound like a punchline waiting to happen, our research aims to put a serious spin on this peculiar correlation and uncover whether there's more to the name than meets the eye. After all, who knew that pollution and puns could go hand in hand?
Before delving into the nitty-gritty statistical analysis, it's important to air out the rationale behind this seemingly unconventional investigation. One might wonder, "What's in a name?" Well, we're here to find out if the name Jaime carries a faint whiff of influence on the air quality in Reading, Pennsylvania, or if it's simply a case of statistical tomfoolery. Don't worry, we promise not to "g(a)sk" for forgiveness for this pun – it's just too "air-resistible."
As researchers, we understand that the interplay between personal identifiers and environmental factors may raise more than a few eyebrows. However, as the saying goes, "Don't judge a book by its cover" – or in this case, a research paper by its whimsical premise. We're here to challenge assumptions, dig deeper than a mole in a coal mine, and, if all else fails, entertain our readers with a "punny" quip or two along the way. So grab your oxygen masks, because we're about to embark on a journey that's as illuminating as it is unexpected.

[[RESULTS]]
The statistical analysis of the data collected from the US Social Security Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency revealed a positively eye-popping correlation coefficient of 0.8468125 between the popularity of the first name Jaime and air pollution levels in Reading, Pennsylvania from 1980 to 2022. This strong correlation suggests that there may indeed be something more than just fresh air at play here, and it leaves us pondering the question: Is there a "Jaime-d" connection between the name Jaime and the air quality in Reading, Pennsylvania, or is this all just a statistical fluke?
In the famous words of the dad joke enthusiast, "You can't run from pollution forever... but you can name it!" We couldn't resist slipping in a name-related dad joke, and we hope it brings a breath of fresh air to this rather unusual topic.
The scatterplot (Fig. 1) graphically illustrates the striking relationship between the frequency of the name Jaime and air pollution levels in Reading, Pennsylvania. The line of best fit is as clear as an unpolluted blue sky, demonstrating the remarkable coherence between these seemingly unrelated variables.
As we digest these findings, it's hard not to appreciate the unexpectedly intriguing nature of this correlation. It's like finding out that a "breath of fresh air" can also be associated with the name Jaime - pun definitely intended. We hope this discovery adds a bit of levity to the scientific discourse and encourages others to approach their own research with an open mind and a touch of humor.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our investigation has unveiled a remarkably robust correlation between the popularity of the first name Jaime and air pollution levels in Reading, Pennsylvania. This unexpected link has not only raised eyebrows but also sparked a chain reaction of puns and ponderings. It seems that the air in Reading may indeed carry a faint whiff of "Jaime," adding an intriguing layer to the city's atmospheric composition.

As we wrap up our findings, we can't help but insert a dad joke to clear the air. Did you hear about the scientist who named all his pets after elements? He had a dog named "Curium" – she had a "Radon" bark! Now, we might not be naming pets after pollutants, but the connection between names and air quality sure has a "noble" ring to it, wouldn't you say?

Our research serves as a breath of fresh air in the realm of environmental and sociological studies. However, much like a good dad joke, sometimes things just don't need unraveling any further. We assert that no further research is needed in this area. But don't worry, we won't leave you "hanging" – there are plenty of other avenues of inquiry waiting to be explored.

And with that, we part ways, leaving you to ponder the whimsical interplay of names and noxious fumes. Thank you for "bearing" with us through this scholarly adventure, and may your future research endeavors be as enlightening and unexpected as this one.

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 Jaime's Fame and Reading's Air - A Whiff of Name Popularity and Pollution in Pennsylvania. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Quirky Sociological Studies

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 Jaime's Fame and Reading's Air - A Whiff of Name Popularity and Pollution in Pennsylvania. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for Quirky Social Science 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 Jaime's Fame and Reading's Air - A Whiff of Name Popularity and Pollution in Pennsylvania with an abstract of In this research, we explore the intriguing and slightly quirky relationship between the popularity of the first name Jaime and air pollution levels in the charming city of Reading, Pennsylvania. Despite eye-rolling skepticism, we approached this investigation with scientific rigor, leaving no stone unturned in our quest for understanding. Utilizing data from the US Social Security Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency, we embarked on a journey that would make even the most seasoned statistics enthusiast raise an amused eyebrow.
Our findings revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.8468125 and p < 0.01, spanning the years 1980 to 2022, indicating a surprisingly strong link between the frequency of the name Jaime and air pollution levels in Reading, Pennsylvania. While this correlation may seem as unlikely as finding a needle in a haystack, our results left us "Jaimeing" with excitement. It's undeniable that this connection has implications that reach beyond mere amusement, potentially shedding light on a previously unexplored facet of environmental and sociological phenomena.
As we peel back the layers of this curious onion, we invite readers to join us in our investigation, to witness the fusion of statistical analysis and whimsy, and to perhaps share a chuckle at the unexpected synergy of names and noxious fumes. After all, what's a research paper without a little "dad joke" to clear the air?

ChatGPT:

Jaime name popularity, air pollution, Pennsylvania, Reading, correlation coefficient, US Social Security Administration data, Environmental Protection Agency data, sociological phenomena, statistical analysis

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

Random correlation

Discover a new correlation

View all correlations

View all research papers

Report an error

Data details

Popularity of the first name Jaime
Detailed data title: Babies of all sexes born in the US named Jaime
Source: US Social Security Administration
See what else correlates with Popularity of the first name Jaime

Air pollution in Reading, Pennsylvania
Detailed data title: Percentage of days with air quality at 'unhealthy for sensitive groups' or worse in Reading, PA
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
See what else correlates with Air pollution in Reading, Pennsylvania

Correlation r = 0.8468125 (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 = 0.7170914 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 71.7% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Air pollution in Reading, Pennsylvania) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Popularity of the first name Jaime) over the 43 years from 1980 through 2022.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 8.3E-13.^Show 0.0000000000008316827231773840
The p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme.^Note 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 0.85 in 8.3E-11% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 1,202,381,595,928 random variables^Note You don't actually need 1 trillion variables to find a correlation like this one. I don't have that many variables in my database. You can also correlate variables that are not independent. I do this a lot.

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

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

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

[ 0.73, 0.91 ] 95% correlation confidence interval (using the Fisher z-transformation)
^{Read more about the confidence interval} 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: ^Note 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.

	1980	1981	1982	1983	1984	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
Popularity of the first name Jaime (Babies born)	4109	3795	3543	3005	2679	2739	2432	2291	2206	2261	2319	2186	2112	2081	1968	1902	1811	1635	1728	1702	1576	1634	1533	1526	1450	1453	1447	1409	1168	1099	899	856	815	776	693	677	715	669	626	569	550	509	520
Air pollution in Reading, Pennsylvania (Bad air quality days)	20.4986	14.2458	12.3288	14.7945	9.01639	10.6849	7.94521	10.411	16.6667	9.31507	8.21918	12.6027	3.82514	9.31507	6.57534	8.76712	7.65027	7.39726	11.7808	11.7808	4.64481	10.9589	12.3288	4.93151	2.73224	6.30137	5.11182	7.32601	5.7377	1.91781	7.12329	3.0137	3.55191	3.28767	2.19178	1.64384	1.91257	1.36986	1.36986	1.64384	0.276243	1.36986	0.547945

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^Note 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^Note 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. ^{Show the steps to do this.} 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([4109,3795,3543,3005,2679,2739,2432,2291,2206,2261,2319,2186,2112,2081,1968,1902,1811,1635,1728,1702,1576,1634,1533,1526,1450,1453,1447,1409,1168,1099,899,856,815,776,693,677,715,669,626,569,550,509,520,])
array_2 = np.array([20.4986,14.2458,12.3288,14.7945,9.01639,10.6849,7.94521,10.411,16.6667,9.31507,8.21918,12.6027,3.82514,9.31507,6.57534,8.76712,7.65027,7.39726,11.7808,11.7808,4.64481,10.9589,12.3288,4.93151,2.73224,6.30137,5.11182,7.32601,5.7377,1.91781,7.12329,3.0137,3.55191,3.28767,2.19178,1.64384,1.91257,1.36986,1.36986,1.64384,0.276243,1.36986,0.547945,])
array_1_name = "Popularity of the first name Jaime"
array_2_name = "Air pollution in Reading, Pennsylvania"

# 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. ^Note 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 ^Note 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 Popularity of the first name Jaime
Line chart for only Air pollution in Reading, Pennsylvania
AI-generated correlation image
The spurious research paper: Jaime's Fame and Reading's Air - A Whiff of Name Popularity and Pollution in Pennsylvania

View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Bravo! Your evaluation rocks!

Correlation ID: 3206 · Black Variable ID: 2328 · Red Variable ID: 21126


Problem variable:
Issue:
Additional details: Optional
Confirm you are a human: