about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #3,285 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Super Bowl Champion's Winning Score and the second variable is The number of printing press operators in North Carolina.  The chart goes from 2010 to 2022, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As winning scores decreased, fans printed fewer celebratory T-shirts, leading to a decreased demand for printing press operators in North Carolina. It seems the printing press industry just couldn't handle the shift in Super Bowl success, and had to press on without as many operators.

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image of a humorous scene inspired by the Super Bowl. Show a bustling street in North Carolina with printing press operators producing "We Are the Champions" t-shirts. In the background, display a scoreboard indicating the winning score as 21-17, capturing the frenzied excitement of the post-game rush. The image should have a humorous and lively tone, capturing the fervor and joy of celebrating the championship. 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: Super Bowl Champion's Winning Score and The number of printing press operators in North Carolina. 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: Glitch art a meme Steampunk Cute cartoon a funny image macro
ChatGPT: a funny image macro

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 Super Bowl Champion's Winning Score and The number of printing press operators in North Carolina, in the following situation: Because as the Super Bowl winning score decreases, printing press operators in North Carolina increase to keep up with the demand for "We Are the Champions" t-shirts.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In the scene, a scoreboard at the Super Bowl reads the winning score, 21-17, while on the streets of North Carolina, more printing press operators are seen hurriedly producing "We Are the Champions" t-shirts to meet the increased demand.

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 funny image macro ] and depicting this scene: In the scene, a scoreboard at the Super Bowl reads the winning score, 21-17, while on the streets of North Carolina, more printing press operators are seen hurriedly producing "We Are the Champions" t-shirts to meet the increased demand. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image of a humorous scene inspired by the Super Bowl. Show a bustling street in North Carolina with printing press operators producing "We Are the Champions" t-shirts. In the background, display a scoreboard indicating the winning score as 21-17, capturing the frenzied excitement of the post-game rush. The image should have a humorous and lively tone, capturing the fervor and joy of celebrating the championship.

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

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

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 (fine-tuned)
System prompt: You provide humorous responses in the form of plausible sounding explanations for correlations. You assume the correlation is causative for the purpose of the explanation even if it is ridiculous. You do not chat with the user, you only reply with the causal connection explanation and nothing else.
User prompt: Please make up a funny explanation for how a decrease in Super Bowl Champion's Winning Score caused The number of printing press operators in North Carolina to decrease. Include one good pun.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.05)
Super Bowl Scores and Print Press Prowess: A Winning Connection?

Journal of Sports Analytics and Media Studies

Jan 2024

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




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

Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Super Bowl Champion's Winning Score and The number of printing press operators in North Carolina. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Include a pun in the title.

Your research team used data from Wikipedia and Bureau of Larbor Statistics to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.6702521 and p < 0.05 for 2010 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]]
Super Bowl Scores and Print Press Prowess: A Winning Connection?

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper investigates the curious relationship between the winning score of the Super Bowl and the number of printing press operators in North Carolina. Using data from Wikipedia and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, we applied rigorous statistical analysis to uncover the hidden correlation lurking beneath the surface. Our findings revealed a surprising correlation coefficient of 0.6702521 and a p-value of less than 0.05 for the years 2010 to 2022. Our results suggest that there may be a connection between the exhilarating feats on the football field and the pressing operations in the printing world. This paper aims to provoke additional inquiry and stimulate thought on the interplay between seemingly disparate domains.


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

Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Super Bowl Champion's Winning Score and The number of printing press operators in North Carolina. Make lots of 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]]
Super Bowl Scores and Print Press Prowess: A Winning Connection?

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper investigates the curious relationship between the winning score of the Super Bowl and the number of printing press operators in North Carolina. Using data from Wikipedia and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, we applied rigorous statistical analysis to uncover the hidden correlation lurking beneath the surface. Our findings revealed a surprising correlation coefficient of 0.6702521 and a p-value of less than 0.05 for the years 2010 to 2022. Our results suggest that there may be a connection between the exhilarating feats on the football field and the pressing operations in the printing world. This paper aims to provoke additional inquiry and stimulate thought on the interplay between seemingly disparate domains.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

The intersection of sports and economics has long been a subject of intense scrutiny by researchers and armchair analysts alike. However, while most studies focus on the financial impacts of sporting events, this paper delves into a less explored avenue of inquiry - the curious connection between the Super Bowl winning scores and the number of printing press operators in North Carolina.

The rationale for exploring such an unusual pairing of variables sprang from a combination of idle curiosity and an abundance of statistical tools at our disposal. After all, what could be more thrilling to the average person than the exhilarating world of football and the riveting world of, well, printing press operation? One might even say that we were motivated by an almost *ink*explicable fascination with these seemingly disparate realms, and were eager to uncover any underlying unity in the apparently *pressed*ding worlds of sports and printing.

Additionally, the p-value of less than 0.05 and a correlation coefficient of 0.6702521 for the years 2010 to 2022 piqued our interest, like the unexpected twist in the plot of a thrilling mystery novel. Could it be that beneath the pomp and circumstance of the Super Bowl, there exists a hitherto unexplored connection to the rhythm of the printing press? Or are these findings but a statistical illusion, a mere *ink*ling of correlation that vanishes upon closer scrutiny?

This paper sets out to uncover the mysteries lurking within the world of statistical analysis and to shed light on the seemingly inscrutable relationship between Super Bowl triumphs and the nimble fingers of printing press operators. So, buckle up and prepare for a ride through the *press*ing questions and potentially *score*stching revelations that lie ahead.


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

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Super Bowl Champion's Winning Score and The number of printing press operators in North Carolina. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

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

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then you might move on to cartoons and children's shows that you watched for research.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Super Bowl Scores and Print Press Prowess: A Winning Connection?

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper investigates the curious relationship between the winning score of the Super Bowl and the number of printing press operators in North Carolina. Using data from Wikipedia and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, we applied rigorous statistical analysis to uncover the hidden correlation lurking beneath the surface. Our findings revealed a surprising correlation coefficient of 0.6702521 and a p-value of less than 0.05 for the years 2010 to 2022. Our results suggest that there may be a connection between the exhilarating feats on the football field and the pressing operations in the printing world. This paper aims to provoke additional inquiry and stimulate thought on the interplay between seemingly disparate domains.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The intersection of sports and economics has long been a subject of intense scrutiny by researchers and armchair analysts alike. However, while most studies focus on the financial impacts of sporting events, this paper delves into a less explored avenue of inquiry - the curious connection between the Super Bowl winning scores and the number of printing press operators in North Carolina.
The rationale for exploring such an unusual pairing of variables sprang from a combination of idle curiosity and an abundance of statistical tools at our disposal. After all, what could be more thrilling to the average person than the exhilarating world of football and the riveting world of, well, printing press operation? One might even say that we were motivated by an almost *ink*explicable fascination with these seemingly disparate realms, and were eager to uncover any underlying unity in the apparently *pressed*ding worlds of sports and printing.
Additionally, the p-value of less than 0.05 and a correlation coefficient of 0.6702521 for the years 2010 to 2022 piqued our interest, like the unexpected twist in the plot of a thrilling mystery novel. Could it be that beneath the pomp and circumstance of the Super Bowl, there exists a hitherto unexplored connection to the rhythm of the printing press? Or are these findings but a statistical illusion, a mere *ink*ling of correlation that vanishes upon closer scrutiny?
This paper sets out to uncover the mysteries lurking within the world of statistical analysis and to shed light on the seemingly inscrutable relationship between Super Bowl triumphs and the nimble fingers of printing press operators. So, buckle up and prepare for a ride through the *press*ing questions and potentially *score*stching revelations that lie ahead.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

A comprehensive review of the literature reveals a dearth of scholarly investigations into the intriguing intersection of Super Bowl scores and the number of printing press operators in North Carolina. However, Smith (2015) delves into the world of sports economics and its connection to various labor markets, providing a solid foundation for our research. Nonetheless, the paucity of direct references to printing press operators in North Carolina in the context of sports events is conspicuous.

In "The Economics of Sports," Doe (2018) offers a robust analysis of the economic implications of professional sports, but sadly omits any reference to the printing industry. Jones (2019) explores the labor market in North Carolina in detail, but the correlation with Super Bowl scores remains glaringly absent from existing scholarly works.

On a more tangential note, "The Printing Revolution in Early Modern Europe" by Eisenstein (1983) presents a historical overview of the printing press's impact on society, albeit devoid of any reference to American football. Similarly, "The Score Takes Care of Itself" by Walsh (2009) philosophizes on leadership and success in the realm of football, but its relevance to printing press operators in North Carolina remains tangential at best.

Turning to the world of fiction, "Inkheart" by Funke (2003) and "Printer's Devil Court" by Harris (2014) hold promise for shedding light on the esoteric connection between Super Bowl scores and the printing press. However, their focus on fantastical realms and macabre mysteries may offer little solace to the analytical researcher seeking empirical evidence.

Entertainment media, such as the animated series "Press Start" and the children's show "The Printables," might seem tenuously relevant at first glance. Nonetheless, the authors find that a review of these sources has brought about some unexpectedly compelling insights. After all, who knows what valuable knowledge might be gleaned from the seemingly unlikeliest of sources?


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

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Super Bowl Champion's Winning Score and The number of printing press operators in North Carolina. Make lots of 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 Wikipedia and Bureau of Larbor Statistics . You used data from 2010 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]]
Super Bowl Scores and Print Press Prowess: A Winning Connection?

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper investigates the curious relationship between the winning score of the Super Bowl and the number of printing press operators in North Carolina. Using data from Wikipedia and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, we applied rigorous statistical analysis to uncover the hidden correlation lurking beneath the surface. Our findings revealed a surprising correlation coefficient of 0.6702521 and a p-value of less than 0.05 for the years 2010 to 2022. Our results suggest that there may be a connection between the exhilarating feats on the football field and the pressing operations in the printing world. This paper aims to provoke additional inquiry and stimulate thought on the interplay between seemingly disparate domains.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
The intersection of sports and economics has long been a subject of intense scrutiny by researchers and armchair analysts alike. However, while most studies focus on the financial impacts of sporting events, this paper delves into a less explored avenue of inquiry - the curious connection between the Super Bowl winning scores and the number of printing press operators in North Carolina.
The rationale for exploring such an unusual pairing of variables sprang from a combination of idle curiosity and an abundance of statistical tools at our disposal. After all, what could be more thrilling to the average person than the exhilarating world of football and the riveting world of, well, printing press operation? One might even say that we were motivated by an almost *ink*explicable fascination with these seemingly disparate realms, and were eager to uncover any underlying unity in the apparently *pressed*ding worlds of sports and printing.
Additionally, the p-value of less than 0.05 and a correlation coefficient of 0.6702521 for the years 2010 to 2022 piqued our interest, like the unexpected twist in the plot of a thrilling mystery novel. Could it be that beneath the pomp and circumstance of the Super Bowl, there exists a hitherto unexplored connection to the rhythm of the printing press? Or are these findings but a statistical illusion, a mere *ink*ling of correlation that vanishes upon closer scrutiny?
This paper sets out to uncover the mysteries lurking within the world of statistical analysis and to shed light on the seemingly inscrutable relationship between Super Bowl triumphs and the nimble fingers of printing press operators. So, buckle up and prepare for a ride through the *press*ing questions and potentially *score*stching revelations that lie ahead.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

Data Collection:
The data for this study was gathered from a variety of sources, including Wikipedia and the Bureau of Labor Statistics. We utilized the impressive power of the internet to collect information on Super Bowl Champion's winning scores from 2010 to 2022. The number of printing press operators in North Carolina was also obtained from these sources, with a keen eye for accuracy and a firm grasp on the *pressing* need for reliable data.

Statistical Analysis:
To unravel the potential connection between Super Bowl scores and the number of printing press operators, we applied sophisticated statistical methods. The correlation coefficient was calculated to measure the strength and direction of the linear relationship between the two variables. Additionally, a p-value was determined to evaluate the significance of the observed correlation. These calculations were conducted with the precision of a quarterback throwing a touchdown pass and the methodical approach of a seasoned printing press operator aligning the paper *just* right.

Data Cleaning:
Prior to analysis, the data underwent a thorough cleansing process to ensure its reliability and accuracy. Outliers were scrutinized with the critical eye of a referee reviewing a controversial call, and missing values were treated with the tender care of a librarian mending a torn page. The data set emerged from this process as pristine as a freshly printed page, ready to divulge its *score*tastic secrets.

Modeling:
Various statistical models were considered to capture the potential relationship between Super Bowl scores and the number of printing press operators. The models were evaluated based on their ability to provide meaningful insights without resorting to a *false start* in their predictions. Ultimately, the most suitable modeling approach was selected with the discerning judgment of a coach choosing the best play for a crucial game-winning drive.

Validation:
To ensure the robustness of our findings, the statistical analysis went through a rigorous validation process. The results were cross-validated using different techniques and were further scrutinized to detect any potential biases or anomalies. This validation process was executed with the same diligence as a meticulous editor reviewing a manuscript for publication, leaving no room for statistical *fumbles* or *typographical* errors.

Ethical Considerations:
Throughout the research process, ethical guidelines for data usage and citation were strictly adhered to. The integrity of the data sources was upheld with the steadfast commitment of an *upright* citizen, ensuring that the findings of this study are grounded in an ethical and responsible approach to research.

Overall, the methodology employed in this study leveraged the intersection of statistical analysis and playful curiosity to shed light on the *winning score* of Super Bowl Champion's and the *pressing* activities of printing press operators in North Carolina.


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

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Super Bowl Champion's Winning Score and The number of printing press operators in North Carolina. Make lots of 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 Wikipedia and Bureau of Larbor Statistics .

For the time period 2010 to 2022, you found a correlation 0.6702521, r-squared of 0.4492378, and p < 0.05.

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]]
Super Bowl Scores and Print Press Prowess: A Winning Connection?

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper investigates the curious relationship between the winning score of the Super Bowl and the number of printing press operators in North Carolina. Using data from Wikipedia and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, we applied rigorous statistical analysis to uncover the hidden correlation lurking beneath the surface. Our findings revealed a surprising correlation coefficient of 0.6702521 and a p-value of less than 0.05 for the years 2010 to 2022. Our results suggest that there may be a connection between the exhilarating feats on the football field and the pressing operations in the printing world. This paper aims to provoke additional inquiry and stimulate thought on the interplay between seemingly disparate domains.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
The intersection of sports and economics has long been a subject of intense scrutiny by researchers and armchair analysts alike. However, while most studies focus on the financial impacts of sporting events, this paper delves into a less explored avenue of inquiry - the curious connection between the Super Bowl winning scores and the number of printing press operators in North Carolina.
The rationale for exploring such an unusual pairing of variables sprang from a combination of idle curiosity and an abundance of statistical tools at our disposal. After all, what could be more thrilling to the average person than the exhilarating world of football and the riveting world of, well, printing press operation? One might even say that we were motivated by an almost *ink*explicable fascination with these seemingly disparate realms, and were eager to uncover any underlying unity in the apparently *pressed*ding worlds of sports and printing.
Additionally, the p-value of less than 0.05 and a correlation coefficient of 0.6702521 for the years 2010 to 2022 piqued our interest, like the unexpected twist in the plot of a thrilling mystery novel. Could it be that beneath the pomp and circumstance of the Super Bowl, there exists a hitherto unexplored connection to the rhythm of the printing press? Or are these findings but a statistical illusion, a mere *ink*ling of correlation that vanishes upon closer scrutiny?
This paper sets out to uncover the mysteries lurking within the world of statistical analysis and to shed light on the seemingly inscrutable relationship between Super Bowl triumphs and the nimble fingers of printing press operators. So, buckle up and prepare for a ride through the *press*ing questions and potentially *score*stching revelations that lie ahead.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The investigation into the connection between Super Bowl winning scores and the number of printing press operators in North Carolina yielded some intriguing results. The data analysis for the years 2010 to 2022 revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.6702521, indicating a moderately strong positive relationship between the two variables. Moreover, the r-squared value of 0.4492378 suggests that approximately 44.92% of the variability in the number of printing press operators can be explained by the winning scores of the Super Bowl.

Additionally, the p-value of less than 0.05 provides compelling evidence to reject the null hypothesis, further bolstering the plausibility of the observed relationship. This result suggests that the likelihood of obtaining such a strong correlation coefficient purely by chance is less than 5%, indicating a statistically significant association between these seemingly unrelated phenomena.

Fig. 1 presents a scatterplot illustrating the robust correlation between the winning scores of the Super Bowl and the number of printing press operators in North Carolina. The points on the scatterplot form a striking pattern, akin to the precise alignment of inked letters on a freshly printed page, showcasing the undeniable connection uncovered by our analysis.

These findings raise thought-provoking questions about the interplay between sporting triumphs and the labor force in the printing industry. While it may seem like a stretch to link the roar of the crowd during a touchdown to the whirl of printing press machinery, our results point to a potential link that warrants further exploration. One might even say that the statistical significance of this relationship is as surprising as finding a typo in a well-proofread manuscript.

In conclusion, our study provides compelling evidence of a correlation between the winning scores of the Super Bowl and the number of printing press operators in North Carolina. This unexpected connection opens the door to a new realm of inquiry, prompting us to ponder the intricate dance between athletic prowess and the operations of the printing world. So, just as an astute editor carefully scrutinizes every word on the page, we invite readers to delve into the nuances of this curious relationship and ponder the *press*ing questions it raises.


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

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Super Bowl Champion's Winning Score and The number of printing press operators in North Carolina. Make lots of 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]]
Super Bowl Scores and Print Press Prowess: A Winning Connection?

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper investigates the curious relationship between the winning score of the Super Bowl and the number of printing press operators in North Carolina. Using data from Wikipedia and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, we applied rigorous statistical analysis to uncover the hidden correlation lurking beneath the surface. Our findings revealed a surprising correlation coefficient of 0.6702521 and a p-value of less than 0.05 for the years 2010 to 2022. Our results suggest that there may be a connection between the exhilarating feats on the football field and the pressing operations in the printing world. This paper aims to provoke additional inquiry and stimulate thought on the interplay between seemingly disparate domains.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
A comprehensive review of the literature reveals a dearth of scholarly investigations into the intriguing intersection of Super Bowl scores and the number of printing press operators in North Carolina. However, Smith (2015) delves into the world of sports economics and its connection to various labor markets, providing a solid foundation for our research. Nonetheless, the paucity of direct references to printing press operators in North Carolina in the context of sports events is conspicuous.
In "The Economics of Sports," Doe (2018) offers a robust analysis of the economic implications of professional sports, but sadly omits any reference to the printing industry. Jones (2019) explores the labor market in North Carolina in detail, but the correlation with Super Bowl scores remains glaringly absent from existing scholarly works.
On a more tangential note, "The Printing Revolution in Early Modern Europe" by Eisenstein (1983) presents a historical overview of the printing press's impact on society, albeit devoid of any reference to American football. Similarly, "The Score Takes Care of Itself" by Walsh (2009) philosophizes on leadership and success in the realm of football, but its relevance to printing press operators in North Carolina remains tangential at best.
Turning to the world of fiction, "Inkheart" by Funke (2003) and "Printer's Devil Court" by Harris (2014) hold promise for shedding light on the esoteric connection between Super Bowl scores and the printing press. However, their focus on fantastical realms and macabre mysteries may offer little solace to the analytical researcher seeking empirical evidence.
Entertainment media, such as the animated series "Press Start" and the children's show "The Printables," might seem tenuously relevant at first glance. Nonetheless, the authors find that a review of these sources has brought about some unexpectedly compelling insights. After all, who knows what valuable knowledge might be gleaned from the seemingly unlikeliest of sources?

[[RESULTS]]
The investigation into the connection between Super Bowl winning scores and the number of printing press operators in North Carolina yielded some intriguing results. The data analysis for the years 2010 to 2022 revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.6702521, indicating a moderately strong positive relationship between the two variables. Moreover, the r-squared value of 0.4492378 suggests that approximately 44.92% of the variability in the number of printing press operators can be explained by the winning scores of the Super Bowl.
Additionally, the p-value of less than 0.05 provides compelling evidence to reject the null hypothesis, further bolstering the plausibility of the observed relationship. This result suggests that the likelihood of obtaining such a strong correlation coefficient purely by chance is less than 5%, indicating a statistically significant association between these seemingly unrelated phenomena.
Fig. 1 presents a scatterplot illustrating the robust correlation between the winning scores of the Super Bowl and the number of printing press operators in North Carolina. The points on the scatterplot form a striking pattern, akin to the precise alignment of inked letters on a freshly printed page, showcasing the undeniable connection uncovered by our analysis.
These findings raise thought-provoking questions about the interplay between sporting triumphs and the labor force in the printing industry. While it may seem like a stretch to link the roar of the crowd during a touchdown to the whirl of printing press machinery, our results point to a potential link that warrants further exploration. One might even say that the statistical significance of this relationship is as surprising as finding a typo in a well-proofread manuscript.
In conclusion, our study provides compelling evidence of a correlation between the winning scores of the Super Bowl and the number of printing press operators in North Carolina. This unexpected connection opens the door to a new realm of inquiry, prompting us to ponder the intricate dance between athletic prowess and the operations of the printing world. So, just as an astute editor carefully scrutinizes every word on the page, we invite readers to delve into the nuances of this curious relationship and ponder the *press*ing questions it raises.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The results of our investigation present a fascinating confluence of athletic achievement and industrial endeavors, culminating in a statistically significant association between the winning scores of the Super Bowl and the number of printing press operators in North Carolina. It is as if the ink of statistical analysis has imprinted an unexpected narrative linking the gridiron triumphs to the printing press prowess.

Our findings resonate with the work of Smith (2015), who laid the groundwork for exploring the nexus of sports economics and labor markets. While seemingly tangential to our inquiry, the spirited world of sports inherently encompasses unforeseen economic reverberations that extend into unexpected occupational domains. Similarly, the conspicuous absence of direct references to printing press operators in previous literature underscores the novelty and significance of our study in weaving together these disparate threads of inquiry.

The robust correlation coefficient and the r-squared value substantiate the discernible relationship between the Super Bowl scores and the printing press operators in North Carolina. These numerical indicators serve as the bedrock of our assertion that there exists a palpable, if enigmatic, connection between these seemingly incongruous entities. Much like a chain of rigorous typographical proofs aligning into a coherent narrative, our statistical findings unmask an intriguing narrative lurking within the data, one that demands further exploration.

The scatterplot articulately illustrates the alignment of winning Super Bowl scores with the number of printing press operators, providing a visual testament to the unexpected cohesion between these variables. The pattern of data points on the scatterplot evokes the meticulous order of freshly printed pages, serving as a poignant metaphor for the unanticipated harmony we have unveiled. In a similar vein, the p-value, standing as a sentinel of statistical veracity, challenges any skepticism regarding this unorthodox correlation.

These results not only substantiate our initial inquiry but also beguilingly beckon us to probe deeper into the intricate interplay between sports exuberance and industrial mechanics. The statistical significance of this relationship presents an alluring dichotomy – akin to stumbling upon a surprise ending in a meticulously plotted novel, it compels us to reassess our preconceptions and embrace the unexpected narratives that emerge from the rigor of empirical inquiry.

In closing, our study not only sheds light on the association between Super Bowl scores and the printing press labor force but also opens the floodgates to a realm of inquiry that invites us to question established boundaries and revel in the serendipity of data. Just as a cleverly constructed pun captures the essence of a nuanced message, our findings encapsulate a paradigm-shifting connection that animates the seemingly mundane with the thrill of unexpected discovery.


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

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Super Bowl Champion's Winning Score and The number of printing press operators in North Carolina. Make lots of 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]]
Super Bowl Scores and Print Press Prowess: A Winning Connection?

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper investigates the curious relationship between the winning score of the Super Bowl and the number of printing press operators in North Carolina. Using data from Wikipedia and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, we applied rigorous statistical analysis to uncover the hidden correlation lurking beneath the surface. Our findings revealed a surprising correlation coefficient of 0.6702521 and a p-value of less than 0.05 for the years 2010 to 2022. Our results suggest that there may be a connection between the exhilarating feats on the football field and the pressing operations in the printing world. This paper aims to provoke additional inquiry and stimulate thought on the interplay between seemingly disparate domains.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
The intersection of sports and economics has long been a subject of intense scrutiny by researchers and armchair analysts alike. However, while most studies focus on the financial impacts of sporting events, this paper delves into a less explored avenue of inquiry - the curious connection between the Super Bowl winning scores and the number of printing press operators in North Carolina.
The rationale for exploring such an unusual pairing of variables sprang from a combination of idle curiosity and an abundance of statistical tools at our disposal. After all, what could be more thrilling to the average person than the exhilarating world of football and the riveting world of, well, printing press operation? One might even say that we were motivated by an almost *ink*explicable fascination with these seemingly disparate realms, and were eager to uncover any underlying unity in the apparently *pressed*ding worlds of sports and printing.
Additionally, the p-value of less than 0.05 and a correlation coefficient of 0.6702521 for the years 2010 to 2022 piqued our interest, like the unexpected twist in the plot of a thrilling mystery novel. Could it be that beneath the pomp and circumstance of the Super Bowl, there exists a hitherto unexplored connection to the rhythm of the printing press? Or are these findings but a statistical illusion, a mere *ink*ling of correlation that vanishes upon closer scrutiny?
This paper sets out to uncover the mysteries lurking within the world of statistical analysis and to shed light on the seemingly inscrutable relationship between Super Bowl triumphs and the nimble fingers of printing press operators. So, buckle up and prepare for a ride through the *press*ing questions and potentially *score*stching revelations that lie ahead.

[[RESULTS]]
The investigation into the connection between Super Bowl winning scores and the number of printing press operators in North Carolina yielded some intriguing results. The data analysis for the years 2010 to 2022 revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.6702521, indicating a moderately strong positive relationship between the two variables. Moreover, the r-squared value of 0.4492378 suggests that approximately 44.92% of the variability in the number of printing press operators can be explained by the winning scores of the Super Bowl.
Additionally, the p-value of less than 0.05 provides compelling evidence to reject the null hypothesis, further bolstering the plausibility of the observed relationship. This result suggests that the likelihood of obtaining such a strong correlation coefficient purely by chance is less than 5%, indicating a statistically significant association between these seemingly unrelated phenomena.
Fig. 1 presents a scatterplot illustrating the robust correlation between the winning scores of the Super Bowl and the number of printing press operators in North Carolina. The points on the scatterplot form a striking pattern, akin to the precise alignment of inked letters on a freshly printed page, showcasing the undeniable connection uncovered by our analysis.
These findings raise thought-provoking questions about the interplay between sporting triumphs and the labor force in the printing industry. While it may seem like a stretch to link the roar of the crowd during a touchdown to the whirl of printing press machinery, our results point to a potential link that warrants further exploration. One might even say that the statistical significance of this relationship is as surprising as finding a typo in a well-proofread manuscript.
In conclusion, our study provides compelling evidence of a correlation between the winning scores of the Super Bowl and the number of printing press operators in North Carolina. This unexpected connection opens the door to a new realm of inquiry, prompting us to ponder the intricate dance between athletic prowess and the operations of the printing world. So, just as an astute editor carefully scrutinizes every word on the page, we invite readers to delve into the nuances of this curious relationship and ponder the *press*ing questions it raises.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In summary, our research unearths a correlation that *press*es the boundaries of conventional wisdom, shedding light on the unexpected interplay between the triumphs of the gridiron and the hum of printing press machinery. The statistically significant connection between Super Bowl winning scores and the number of printing press operators in North Carolina is as astonishing as finding a hidden message in a crossword puzzle. The robust correlation coefficient and the persuasive p-value beckon us to contemplate the peculiar dance between athletic glory and the ink-stained endeavors in the realm of printing.
The findings of our study may raise more eyebrows than a poorly executed comb-over, but they leave little room for doubt, much like a well-designed survey with high reliability and validity. It appears that beneath the exciting hustle and bustle of the Super Bowl, there exists a tantalizing link to the rhythmic pulsations of the printing press. The statistical nuances uncovered by our analysis are as compelling as an unexpected plot twist in a suspenseful novel, leaving us with a sense of wonder at the mysterious connections that underlie seemingly unrelated phenomena.
In conclusion, our research tantalizingly suggests that there may be a genuine connection between the *score*board triumphs of the NFL and the *press*ing operations of North Carolina's printing industry. At this juncture, no further research appears necessary in this area, unless one is keen on drawing out even more *punt*iful connections between disparate domains.


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 Super Bowl Scores and Print Press Prowess: A Winning Connection?. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

Journal of Sports Analytics and Media 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 Super Bowl Scores and Print Press Prowess: A Winning Connection?. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for Sports Journalism and Media Studies


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide potential search keywords separated by commas. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide potential search keywords for a paper titled Super Bowl Scores and Print Press Prowess: A Winning Connection? with an abstract of This paper investigates the curious relationship between the winning score of the Super Bowl and the number of printing press operators in North Carolina. Using data from Wikipedia and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, we applied rigorous statistical analysis to uncover the hidden correlation lurking beneath the surface. Our findings revealed a surprising correlation coefficient of 0.6702521 and a p-value of less than 0.05 for the years 2010 to 2022. Our results suggest that there may be a connection between the exhilarating feats on the football field and the pressing operations in the printing world. This paper aims to provoke additional inquiry and stimulate thought on the interplay between seemingly disparate domains.

ChatGPT:

Super Bowl, Super Bowl scores, print press operators, North Carolina, Wikipedia, Bureau of Labor Statistics, statistical analysis, correlation coefficient, p-value, football, printing press operations, interplay, inquiry, connection

*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

Super Bowl Champion's Winning Score
Source: Wikipedia
See what else correlates with Super Bowl Champion's Winning Score

The number of printing press operators in North Carolina
Detailed data title: BLS estimate of printing press operators in North Carolina
Source: Bureau of Larbor Statistics
See what else correlates with The number of printing press operators in North Carolina

Correlation r = 0.6702521 (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 = 0.4492378 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 44.9% of the change in the one variable (i.e., The number of printing press operators in North Carolina) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Super Bowl Champion's Winning Score) over the 13 years from 2010 through 2022.

p < 0.05, which statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.012. 0.0121799219468889130000000000
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 0.67 in 1.2% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 82 random variables Which I absolutely did.
with the same 12 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 12 because we have two variables measured over a period of 13 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.

[ 0.19, 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.
2010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022
Super Bowl Champion's Winning Score (Goals scored)31312134432824344113313123
The number of printing press operators in North Carolina (Printing Press Operators)5180514048005620563052804820502052904860476047604570




Why this works

  1. Data dredging: I have 25,153 variables in my database. I compare all these variables against each other to find ones that randomly match up. That's 632,673,409 correlation calculations! This is called “data dredging.” Instead of starting with a hypothesis and testing it, I instead abused the data to see what correlations shake out. It’s a dangerous way to go about analysis, because any sufficiently large dataset will yield strong correlations completely at random.
  2. Lack of causal connection: There is probably Because these pages are automatically generated, it's possible that the two variables you are viewing are in fact causually related. I take steps to prevent the obvious ones from showing on the site (I don't let data about the weather in one city correlate with the weather in a neighboring city, for example), but sometimes they still pop up. If they are related, cool! You found a loophole.
    no direct connection between these variables, despite what the AI says above. This is exacerbated by the fact that I used "Years" as the base variable. Lots of things happen in a year that are not related to each other! Most studies would use something like "one person" in stead of "one year" to be the "thing" studied.
  3. Observations not independent: For many variables, sequential years are not independent of each other. If a population of people is continuously doing something every day, there is no reason to think they would suddenly change how they are doing that thing on January 1. A simple Personally I don't find any p-value calculation to be 'simple,' but you know what I mean.
    p-value calculation does not take this into account, so mathematically it appears less probable than it really is.
  4. Y-axis doesn't start at zero: I truncated the Y-axes of the graph above. I also used a line graph, which makes the visual connection stand out more than it deserves. Nothing against line graphs. They are great at telling a story when you have linear data! But visually it is deceptive because the only data is at the points on the graph, not the lines on the graph. In between each point, the data could have been doing anything. Like going for a random walk by itself!
    Mathematically what I showed is true, but it is intentionally misleading. Below is the same chart but with both Y-axes starting at zero.




Try it yourself

You can calculate the values on this page on your own! Try running the Python code to see the calculation results. Step 1: Download and install Python on your computer.

Step 2: Open a plaintext editor like Notepad and paste the code below into it.

Step 3: Save the file as "calculate_correlation.py" in a place you will remember, like your desktop. Copy the file location to your clipboard. On Windows, you can right-click the file and click "Properties," and then copy what comes after "Location:" As an example, on my computer the location is "C:\Users\tyler\Desktop"

Step 4: Open a command line window. For example, by pressing start and typing "cmd" and them pressing enter.

Step 5: Install the required modules by typing "pip install numpy", then pressing enter, then typing "pip install scipy", then pressing enter.

Step 6: Navigate to the location where you saved the Python file by using the "cd" command. For example, I would type "cd C:\Users\tyler\Desktop" and push enter.

Step 7: Run the Python script by typing "python calculate_correlation.py"

If you run into any issues, I suggest asking ChatGPT to walk you through installing Python and running the code below on your system. Try this question:

"Walk me through installing Python on my computer to run a script that uses scipy and numpy. Go step-by-step and ask me to confirm before moving on. Start by asking me questions about my operating system so that you know how to proceed. Assume I want the simplest installation with the latest version of Python and that I do not currently have any of the necessary elements installed. Remember to only give me one step per response and confirm I have done it before proceeding."


# These modules make it easier to perform the calculation
import numpy as np
from scipy import stats

# We'll define a function that we can call to return the correlation calculations
def calculate_correlation(array1, array2):

    # Calculate Pearson correlation coefficient and p-value
    correlation, p_value = stats.pearsonr(array1, array2)

    # Calculate R-squared as the square of the correlation coefficient
    r_squared = correlation**2

    return correlation, r_squared, p_value

# These are the arrays for the variables shown on this page, but you can modify them to be any two sets of numbers
array_1 = np.array([31,31,21,34,43,28,24,34,41,13,31,31,23,])
array_2 = np.array([5180,5140,4800,5620,5630,5280,4820,5020,5290,4860,4760,4760,4570,])
array_1_name = "Super Bowl Champion's Winning Score"
array_2_name = "The number of printing press operators in North Carolina"

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

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



Reuseable content

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

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

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

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

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

Download images for these variables:


View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Bravo! Your evaluation rocks!


Correlation ID: 3285 · Black Variable ID: 92 · Red Variable ID: 18454
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0