about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #3,287 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Air pollution in Hilton Head Island, South Carolina and the second variable is NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final point differential.  The chart goes from 1981 to 1993, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As air pollution in Hilton Head Island, South Carolina increased, it led to the inadvertent creation of a new element called "laxonium" in the atmosphere. Laxonium, when inhaled by the lacrosse players, temporarily boosted their strategic thinking and goal-scoring abilities, ultimately widening the point differentials in the NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship. This unexpected discovery has sparked interest in bottling and selling 'laxonium' as a performance-enhancing air supplement for lacrosse teams, leading to a potential air-pollution-based sports industry in the future.

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image of a futuristic lacrosse field set on the shore of a beautiful, pristine beach. The field should be bathed in golden sunlight, with sleek, high-tech equipment and structures surrounding it. The lacrosse players, wearing advanced jerseys and gear, are engaged in an intense game under the clear, blue skies, while advanced technology enhances their performance. The winning team is shown celebrating their victory against the stunning backdrop of the beach and sky. The entire scene should exude a sense of high-tech athleticism and natural beauty. The depiction should include only scenes, people, and objects, it should not include text or speech bubbles.
This image generation prompt was also generated by AI, using the following sequence:

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You select one of a few potential scene descriptors that seems to go along with the variables described. You respond only with the scene descriptions provided and say nothing else.
User prompt: Here are two variables: Air pollution in Hilton Head Island, South Carolina and NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final point differential. 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: High-tech 3D Pixar Style A photo-realistic image A Discovery magazine cover image High-tech
ChatGPT: A high-tech scene

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You describe simple visual scenes that depict the two variables stated. You combine both variables into one scene.
User prompt: Please describe a visual scene that prominently depicts both Air pollution in Hilton Head Island, South Carolina and NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final point differential, in the following situation: Because a decrease in air pollution led to clearer skies, the players had better visibility, allowing them to pass and shoot more accurately, resulting in a larger point differential in the NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: On a sunny day in Hilton Head Island, South Carolina, clear blue skies stretched over the pristine beaches. The clean, fresh air invited a sense of tranquility, with no sign of air pollution. Meanwhile, on a lacrosse field nearby, the teams battled it out in the NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final. The improved visibility brought about by the clear skies allowed the players to swiftly pass and shoot the ball with precision. This led to an impressive point differential in the game, with the winning team celebrating their victory under the crystal-clear sky.

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 high-tech scene ] and depicting this scene: On a sunny day in Hilton Head Island, South Carolina, clear blue skies stretched over the pristine beaches. The clean, fresh air invited a sense of tranquility, with no sign of air pollution. Meanwhile, on a lacrosse field nearby, the teams battled it out in the NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final. The improved visibility brought about by the clear skies allowed the players to swiftly pass and shoot the ball with precision. This led to an impressive point differential in the game, with the winning team celebrating their victory under the crystal-clear sky. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image of a futuristic lacrosse field set on the shore of a beautiful, pristine beach. The field should be bathed in golden sunlight, with sleek, high-tech equipment and structures surrounding it. The lacrosse players, wearing advanced jerseys and gear, are engaged in an intense game under the clear, blue skies, while advanced technology enhances their performance. The winning team is shown celebrating their victory against the stunning backdrop of the beach and sky. The entire scene should exude a sense of high-tech athleticism and natural beauty.

*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 increases in Air pollution in Hilton Head Island, South Carolina positively influenced NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final point differential.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Clearing the Air: Sniffing Out the Link Between Air Pollution and Lacrosse Point Differential on Hilton Head Island

Journal of Environmental Athletics

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 Air pollution in Hilton Head Island, South Carolina and NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final point differential. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

Include a pun in the title.

Your research team used data from Environmental Protection Agency and NCAA to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.7419540 and p < 0.01 for 1981 to 1993.

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]]
"Clearing the Air: Sniffing Out the Link Between Air Pollution and Lacrosse Point Differential on Hilton Head Island"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This investigative study delves into the relationship between air pollution levels on Hilton Head Island, South Carolina, and the point differential in the NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final. Leveraging data acquired from the Environmental Protection Agency and the NCAA for the years 1981 to 1993, we used statistical analyses to scrutinize this peculiar association.

After meticulously sifting through the data, our research team uncovered a rather "airy" correlation coefficient of 0.7419540 and p < 0.01, indicating a noteworthy link between the two variables. Our findings suggest that higher air pollution levels may be associated with greater point differentials in the championship game. It seems that the old adage "a breath of fresh air" might not just be a turn of phrase after all.

Additionally, our research also revealed a surprising pattern in the data, prompting us to ask: "What do you call a respiratory therapist who becomes a lacrosse coach? An "in-haler"!"

In conclusion, our study sheds light on the unanticipated connection between air quality and lacrosse performance, emphasizing the need for further exploration of environmental factors in sports outcomes. We hope this research will encourage future investigations into the "atmospheric advantage" in athletic competitions.


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 Air pollution in Hilton Head Island, South Carolina and NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final point differential. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Clearing the Air: Sniffing Out the Link Between Air Pollution and Lacrosse Point Differential on Hilton Head Island"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This investigative study delves into the relationship between air pollution levels on Hilton Head Island, South Carolina, and the point differential in the NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final. Leveraging data acquired from the Environmental Protection Agency and the NCAA for the years 1981 to 1993, we used statistical analyses to scrutinize this peculiar association.

After meticulously sifting through the data, our research team uncovered a rather "airy" correlation coefficient of 0.7419540 and p < 0.01, indicating a noteworthy link between the two variables. Our findings suggest that higher air pollution levels may be associated with greater point differentials in the championship game. It seems that the old adage "a breath of fresh air" might not just be a turn of phrase after all.

Additionally, our research also revealed a surprising pattern in the data, prompting us to ask: "What do you call a respiratory therapist who becomes a lacrosse coach? An "in-haler"!"

In conclusion, our study sheds light on the unanticipated connection between air quality and lacrosse performance, emphasizing the need for further exploration of environmental factors in sports outcomes. We hope this research will encourage future investigations into the "atmospheric advantage" in athletic competitions.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

Air pollution has long been recognized as a significant environmental and public health concern, but its influence on sports performance remains a relatively unexplored area of research. The unique microcosm of Hilton Head Island, South Carolina, provides an intriguing setting to investigate the potential effects of air quality on athletic outcomes. As we embark on this academic adventure, we cannot help but ponder: "Why did the air pollution scientist bring a basketball to the conference? Because he heard they were discussing 'air quality'!"

The NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final serves as an ideal platform for observing high-stakes athletic competition, where every goal can tip the scales of victory. Our curiosity piqued, we sought to examine whether the proverbial "winds of change" in air quality might also impact the final point differentials in this esteemed event. Eager to unearth correlations, we began our analysis with keen interest and a pun at the ready: "Why did the lacrosse team refuse to play in the smog? They didn't want to 'choke'!"

Our investigation aims to contribute to the growing body of knowledge on the intersection of environmental factors and athletic performance. By focusing on a sport known for its fast-paced and physically demanding nature, we seek to pinpoint potential links between air pollution and competitive outcomes. As we delve into this pressing research question, we are reminded that sometimes, the most unexpected connections can emerge from unlikely sources – much like a surprising punchline in a scientific discussion.


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 Air pollution in Hilton Head Island, South Carolina and NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final point differential. 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 a few real TV shows that sound like they might be relevant to the topic that you watched as research.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Clearing the Air: Sniffing Out the Link Between Air Pollution and Lacrosse Point Differential on Hilton Head Island"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This investigative study delves into the relationship between air pollution levels on Hilton Head Island, South Carolina, and the point differential in the NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final. Leveraging data acquired from the Environmental Protection Agency and the NCAA for the years 1981 to 1993, we used statistical analyses to scrutinize this peculiar association.

After meticulously sifting through the data, our research team uncovered a rather "airy" correlation coefficient of 0.7419540 and p < 0.01, indicating a noteworthy link between the two variables. Our findings suggest that higher air pollution levels may be associated with greater point differentials in the championship game. It seems that the old adage "a breath of fresh air" might not just be a turn of phrase after all.

Additionally, our research also revealed a surprising pattern in the data, prompting us to ask: "What do you call a respiratory therapist who becomes a lacrosse coach? An "in-haler"!"

In conclusion, our study sheds light on the unanticipated connection between air quality and lacrosse performance, emphasizing the need for further exploration of environmental factors in sports outcomes. We hope this research will encourage future investigations into the "atmospheric advantage" in athletic competitions.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
Air pollution has long been recognized as a significant environmental and public health concern, but its influence on sports performance remains a relatively unexplored area of research. The unique microcosm of Hilton Head Island, South Carolina, provides an intriguing setting to investigate the potential effects of air quality on athletic outcomes. As we embark on this academic adventure, we cannot help but ponder: "Why did the air pollution scientist bring a basketball to the conference? Because he heard they were discussing 'air quality'!"
The NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final serves as an ideal platform for observing high-stakes athletic competition, where every goal can tip the scales of victory. Our curiosity piqued, we sought to examine whether the proverbial "winds of change" in air quality might also impact the final point differentials in this esteemed event. Eager to unearth correlations, we began our analysis with keen interest and a pun at the ready: "Why did the lacrosse team refuse to play in the smog? They didn't want to 'choke'!"
Our investigation aims to contribute to the growing body of knowledge on the intersection of environmental factors and athletic performance. By focusing on a sport known for its fast-paced and physically demanding nature, we seek to pinpoint potential links between air pollution and competitive outcomes. As we delve into this pressing research question, we are reminded that sometimes, the most unexpected connections can emerge from unlikely sources – much like a surprising punchline in a scientific discussion.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The connection between air pollution and sport performance has been a subject of increasing interest in recent years. Smith et al. (2017) found a positive correlation between air pollution levels and decreased athletic endurance in long-distance runners, while Doe and Jones (2018) highlighted the potential impact of air quality on cardiovascular function during high-intensity exercise. However, the specific relationship between air pollution and lacrosse performance, particularly in the context of the NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final point differentials, has not been extensively explored.

In "Airborne: How the World Became a Stage for Air Pollution," the authors argue that air quality can significantly affect human activities, from daily routines to large-scale events, with potential implications for athletic competitions. This insightful book sets the stage for our investigation into the potential effects of air pollution on the dynamics of lacrosse championship games.

In contrast, "Gone with the Wind: A Tale of Atmospheric Turbulence" provides a fictional yet thought-provoking perspective on the intertwining of environmental factors and athletic endeavors. This whimsical novel prompts readers to imagine the unexpected consequences of air quality fluctuations on sports outcomes, offering a rich backdrop for our empirical inquiry.

Turning to the televised realm, "The Big Pollute Theory" and "Fresh Air Development" are popular shows that explore environmental concerns in a lighthearted manner, shedding light on air quality in various contexts. These programs not only entertained our research team during data analysis marathons but also inspired us to approach our study with a sense of humor and curiosity.

With these diverse sources in mind, we embarked on our investigation to uncover the potential influence of air pollution in shaping the point differentials of the NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final. As we delved into the data, we pondered: "Why did the lacrosse team have to hold its practices in a greenhouse? Because they wanted to improve their 'air game'!"


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 Air pollution in Hilton Head Island, South Carolina and NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final point differential. 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 Environmental Protection Agency and NCAA . You used data from 1981 to 1993

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]]
"Clearing the Air: Sniffing Out the Link Between Air Pollution and Lacrosse Point Differential on Hilton Head Island"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This investigative study delves into the relationship between air pollution levels on Hilton Head Island, South Carolina, and the point differential in the NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final. Leveraging data acquired from the Environmental Protection Agency and the NCAA for the years 1981 to 1993, we used statistical analyses to scrutinize this peculiar association.

After meticulously sifting through the data, our research team uncovered a rather "airy" correlation coefficient of 0.7419540 and p < 0.01, indicating a noteworthy link between the two variables. Our findings suggest that higher air pollution levels may be associated with greater point differentials in the championship game. It seems that the old adage "a breath of fresh air" might not just be a turn of phrase after all.

Additionally, our research also revealed a surprising pattern in the data, prompting us to ask: "What do you call a respiratory therapist who becomes a lacrosse coach? An "in-haler"!"

In conclusion, our study sheds light on the unanticipated connection between air quality and lacrosse performance, emphasizing the need for further exploration of environmental factors in sports outcomes. We hope this research will encourage future investigations into the "atmospheric advantage" in athletic competitions.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
Air pollution has long been recognized as a significant environmental and public health concern, but its influence on sports performance remains a relatively unexplored area of research. The unique microcosm of Hilton Head Island, South Carolina, provides an intriguing setting to investigate the potential effects of air quality on athletic outcomes. As we embark on this academic adventure, we cannot help but ponder: "Why did the air pollution scientist bring a basketball to the conference? Because he heard they were discussing 'air quality'!"
The NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final serves as an ideal platform for observing high-stakes athletic competition, where every goal can tip the scales of victory. Our curiosity piqued, we sought to examine whether the proverbial "winds of change" in air quality might also impact the final point differentials in this esteemed event. Eager to unearth correlations, we began our analysis with keen interest and a pun at the ready: "Why did the lacrosse team refuse to play in the smog? They didn't want to 'choke'!"
Our investigation aims to contribute to the growing body of knowledge on the intersection of environmental factors and athletic performance. By focusing on a sport known for its fast-paced and physically demanding nature, we seek to pinpoint potential links between air pollution and competitive outcomes. As we delve into this pressing research question, we are reminded that sometimes, the most unexpected connections can emerge from unlikely sources – much like a surprising punchline in a scientific discussion.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

The data collection for this study entailed a comprehensive exploration of publicly available information on air pollution in Hilton Head Island, South Carolina and the point differentials in the NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship finals. The Environmental Protection Agency and the NCAA database served as the primary sources, providing a rich tapestry of data that formed the bedrock of our investigation. As we delved into this endeavor, we couldn't help but chuckle at the thought of a "lacrosse game with smog – talk about a foggy situation!"

To measure air pollution levels, we utilized a hodgepodge of methods – from the traditional monitoring stations to the deployment of a custom-designed contraption dubbed the "Lacrosse Lungs," which, while not altering air quality measurements, certainly added an element of theatricality to our data collection. These diverse sources of data allowed us to capture a holistic view of the atmospheric conditions on the island during the study period. We acknowledge that utilizing such a wide array of sources may raise some eyebrows, but we assure the scientific community that the "Lacrosse Lungs" were a crucial, albeit whimsical, addition to our methodology.

The point differentials in the championship finals were obtained with reputable precision from the NCAA database. In the spirit of thoroughness, we cross-checked the data with eagle-eyed vigilance, leaving no statistically significant stone unturned. This rigorous approach ensured that our analysis was based on a robust foundation, much like a sturdy lacrosse stick in the hands of a seasoned player.

Having amassed this treasure trove of data, we embarked on a voyage through the labyrinthine expanse of statistical analyses. From enchanting encounters with correlation matrices to duels with regression models, our encounters with statistical tools were nothing short of an adventure. These analyses enabled us to extract meaningful insights from the data and unlock the "puzzling" relationship between air pollution and lacrosse point differentials. Throughout this analytical odyssey, we've often found ourselves marveling at the deceptive simplicity of a well-crafted pun – much like the unexpected nuance in our research findings.

The temporal scope of our study spanned from 1981 to 1993, providing a substantial timeframe for observing the fluctuations in air pollution levels and their potential impact on lacrosse championship outcomes. While some may raise their eyebrows at the seemingly peculiar focus of our study, we stand firm in our belief that even the most unconventional research avenues can yield valuable discoveries. After all, isn't science, at its core, a journey of unexpected revelations and the occasional dad joke?


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 Air pollution in Hilton Head Island, South Carolina and NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final point differential. 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 Environmental Protection Agency and NCAA .

For the time period 1981 to 1993, you found a correlation 0.7419540, r-squared of 0.5504957, 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]]
"Clearing the Air: Sniffing Out the Link Between Air Pollution and Lacrosse Point Differential on Hilton Head Island"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This investigative study delves into the relationship between air pollution levels on Hilton Head Island, South Carolina, and the point differential in the NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final. Leveraging data acquired from the Environmental Protection Agency and the NCAA for the years 1981 to 1993, we used statistical analyses to scrutinize this peculiar association.

After meticulously sifting through the data, our research team uncovered a rather "airy" correlation coefficient of 0.7419540 and p < 0.01, indicating a noteworthy link between the two variables. Our findings suggest that higher air pollution levels may be associated with greater point differentials in the championship game. It seems that the old adage "a breath of fresh air" might not just be a turn of phrase after all.

Additionally, our research also revealed a surprising pattern in the data, prompting us to ask: "What do you call a respiratory therapist who becomes a lacrosse coach? An "in-haler"!"

In conclusion, our study sheds light on the unanticipated connection between air quality and lacrosse performance, emphasizing the need for further exploration of environmental factors in sports outcomes. We hope this research will encourage future investigations into the "atmospheric advantage" in athletic competitions.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
Air pollution has long been recognized as a significant environmental and public health concern, but its influence on sports performance remains a relatively unexplored area of research. The unique microcosm of Hilton Head Island, South Carolina, provides an intriguing setting to investigate the potential effects of air quality on athletic outcomes. As we embark on this academic adventure, we cannot help but ponder: "Why did the air pollution scientist bring a basketball to the conference? Because he heard they were discussing 'air quality'!"
The NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final serves as an ideal platform for observing high-stakes athletic competition, where every goal can tip the scales of victory. Our curiosity piqued, we sought to examine whether the proverbial "winds of change" in air quality might also impact the final point differentials in this esteemed event. Eager to unearth correlations, we began our analysis with keen interest and a pun at the ready: "Why did the lacrosse team refuse to play in the smog? They didn't want to 'choke'!"
Our investigation aims to contribute to the growing body of knowledge on the intersection of environmental factors and athletic performance. By focusing on a sport known for its fast-paced and physically demanding nature, we seek to pinpoint potential links between air pollution and competitive outcomes. As we delve into this pressing research question, we are reminded that sometimes, the most unexpected connections can emerge from unlikely sources – much like a surprising punchline in a scientific discussion.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The analysis of the data revealed a strong and statistically significant correlation between air pollution levels and the point differentials in the NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final on Hilton Head Island, South Carolina, for the years 1981 to 1993. The correlation coefficient of 0.7419540 and an r-squared value of 0.5504957 indicated a robust relationship between these variables. This correlation suggests that air pollution may indeed play a role in influencing the point differentials in this championship event. It seems that in this case, "breathing easy" may lead to a lacrosse victory.

Fig. 1 presents a scatterplot illustrating the noteworthy connection between air pollution levels and the point differentials in the championship final. The plot demonstrates a clear trend, further supporting the findings of a substantial relationship between these variables.

The statistical analyses also indicated a significance level of p < 0.01, providing strong evidence that the observed correlation is not merely by chance. This solidifies the notion that air pollution levels could be associated with the performance outcomes of the NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship. What a "breath of fresh air" for our understanding of environmental influences on sports!

Furthermore, our research findings prompt us to consider the practical implications of these results. Could teams gain a strategic advantage by monitoring air quality and adjusting their game plans accordingly? Perhaps the saying "the winds of change are in the air" takes on a whole new meaning in the realm of competitive athletics.

In light of these discoveries, it is clear that further investigation into the relationship between air pollution and athletic performance is warranted. Our findings may encourage a reevaluation of the environmental factors that shape sports outcomes, highlighting the importance of considering air quality in the competitive landscape. After all, when it comes to achieving victory, every breath counts.

In conclusion, our study highlights the unexpected yet compelling link between air pollution levels and the point differentials in the NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final on Hilton Head Island. These results underscore the need for continued exploration of the impact of environmental conditions on athletic competitions, advancing our understanding of the multifaceted influences on sports performance. It seems that when it comes to the interplay of air quality and lacrosse, there's much more than meets the "eye"!


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 Air pollution in Hilton Head Island, South Carolina and NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final point differential. 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]]
"Clearing the Air: Sniffing Out the Link Between Air Pollution and Lacrosse Point Differential on Hilton Head Island"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This investigative study delves into the relationship between air pollution levels on Hilton Head Island, South Carolina, and the point differential in the NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final. Leveraging data acquired from the Environmental Protection Agency and the NCAA for the years 1981 to 1993, we used statistical analyses to scrutinize this peculiar association.

After meticulously sifting through the data, our research team uncovered a rather "airy" correlation coefficient of 0.7419540 and p < 0.01, indicating a noteworthy link between the two variables. Our findings suggest that higher air pollution levels may be associated with greater point differentials in the championship game. It seems that the old adage "a breath of fresh air" might not just be a turn of phrase after all.

Additionally, our research also revealed a surprising pattern in the data, prompting us to ask: "What do you call a respiratory therapist who becomes a lacrosse coach? An "in-haler"!"

In conclusion, our study sheds light on the unanticipated connection between air quality and lacrosse performance, emphasizing the need for further exploration of environmental factors in sports outcomes. We hope this research will encourage future investigations into the "atmospheric advantage" in athletic competitions.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The connection between air pollution and sport performance has been a subject of increasing interest in recent years. Smith et al. (2017) found a positive correlation between air pollution levels and decreased athletic endurance in long-distance runners, while Doe and Jones (2018) highlighted the potential impact of air quality on cardiovascular function during high-intensity exercise. However, the specific relationship between air pollution and lacrosse performance, particularly in the context of the NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final point differentials, has not been extensively explored.
In "Airborne: How the World Became a Stage for Air Pollution," the authors argue that air quality can significantly affect human activities, from daily routines to large-scale events, with potential implications for athletic competitions. This insightful book sets the stage for our investigation into the potential effects of air pollution on the dynamics of lacrosse championship games.
In contrast, "Gone with the Wind: A Tale of Atmospheric Turbulence" provides a fictional yet thought-provoking perspective on the intertwining of environmental factors and athletic endeavors. This whimsical novel prompts readers to imagine the unexpected consequences of air quality fluctuations on sports outcomes, offering a rich backdrop for our empirical inquiry.
Turning to the televised realm, "The Big Pollute Theory" and "Fresh Air Development" are popular shows that explore environmental concerns in a lighthearted manner, shedding light on air quality in various contexts. These programs not only entertained our research team during data analysis marathons but also inspired us to approach our study with a sense of humor and curiosity.
With these diverse sources in mind, we embarked on our investigation to uncover the potential influence of air pollution in shaping the point differentials of the NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final. As we delved into the data, we pondered: "Why did the lacrosse team have to hold its practices in a greenhouse? Because they wanted to improve their 'air game'!"

[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of the data revealed a strong and statistically significant correlation between air pollution levels and the point differentials in the NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final on Hilton Head Island, South Carolina, for the years 1981 to 1993. The correlation coefficient of 0.7419540 and an r-squared value of 0.5504957 indicated a robust relationship between these variables. This correlation suggests that air pollution may indeed play a role in influencing the point differentials in this championship event. It seems that in this case, "breathing easy" may lead to a lacrosse victory.
Fig. 1 presents a scatterplot illustrating the noteworthy connection between air pollution levels and the point differentials in the championship final. The plot demonstrates a clear trend, further supporting the findings of a substantial relationship between these variables.
The statistical analyses also indicated a significance level of p < 0.01, providing strong evidence that the observed correlation is not merely by chance. This solidifies the notion that air pollution levels could be associated with the performance outcomes of the NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship. What a "breath of fresh air" for our understanding of environmental influences on sports!
Furthermore, our research findings prompt us to consider the practical implications of these results. Could teams gain a strategic advantage by monitoring air quality and adjusting their game plans accordingly? Perhaps the saying "the winds of change are in the air" takes on a whole new meaning in the realm of competitive athletics.
In light of these discoveries, it is clear that further investigation into the relationship between air pollution and athletic performance is warranted. Our findings may encourage a reevaluation of the environmental factors that shape sports outcomes, highlighting the importance of considering air quality in the competitive landscape. After all, when it comes to achieving victory, every breath counts.
In conclusion, our study highlights the unexpected yet compelling link between air pollution levels and the point differentials in the NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final on Hilton Head Island. These results underscore the need for continued exploration of the impact of environmental conditions on athletic competitions, advancing our understanding of the multifaceted influences on sports performance. It seems that when it comes to the interplay of air quality and lacrosse, there's much more than meets the "eye"!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The findings of our investigation have illuminated a hitherto unexplored connection between air pollution levels and the point differentials in the NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final on Hilton Head Island, South Carolina. The robust correlation coefficient and significant p-value affirm the presence of a compelling relationship between these variables, echoing the sentiments of previous research on the influence of air quality on athletic performance. As our study has unveiled, it appears that the impact of air pollution extends beyond lung health and environmental concerns to potentially shape the outcomes of lacrosse championship games.

Our results provide empirical support for the theoretical assertions put forth in "Airborne: How the World Became a Stage for Air Pollution." This publication's focus on the pervasive influence of air quality on human activities finds validation in our findings, as we uncover the tangible effects of air pollution on the dynamics of a high-stakes athletic event. It is evident that the "atmospheric advantage" posited by the authors may indeed manifest in the realm of sports, as teams navigate the interplay of environmental conditions and performance outcomes.

Similarly, "Gone with the Wind: A Tale of Atmospheric Turbulence" presented a fictitious yet thought-provoking exploration of the potential repercussions of air quality fluctuations on sports. Our empirical inquiry has lent credence to the notion that such fluctuations can indeed hold implications for athletic competitions, as evidenced by the significant correlation between air pollution levels and lacrosse point differentials. The unforeseen twist in this whimsical novel aligns with the unexpected link we have uncovered, shedding light on the unanticipated interconnection of environmental factors and sports outcomes.

In our quest to unravel the enigmatic relationship between air pollution and lacrosse championship performance, we have also pondered the comedic question posed in our literature review: "Why did the lacrosse team have to hold its practices in a greenhouse? Because they wanted to improve their 'air game'!" It seems that there may be a grain of truth in this jest, as our findings reveal the potential impact of air quality on the strategic maneuvers and competitive dynamics of lacrosse finals.

As we consider the practical implications of our research, we cannot help but contemplate the potential for teams to harness the knowledge of air quality's influence on performance to gain a strategic edge. Perhaps the adage "the winds of change are in the air" takes on a literal significance in the context of competitive athletics, as teams adapt their game plans to optimize their performance under varying environmental conditions. This strategic "breath of fresh air" may usher in a new era of environmental consciousness in sports.

In essence, our study has delved into the uncharted territory of environmental influences on athletic competitions, unearthing a surprising association between air pollution levels and the point differentials in the NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final. The "air game" has taken on a whole new meaning, as environmental conditions emerge as a potential determinant of sports performance. These findings signal the need for continued exploration of the multifaceted influences on sports outcomes, urging a reconsideration of the environmental factors that shape competitive landscapes. It seems that when it comes to achieving victory, every breath truly counts.


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 Air pollution in Hilton Head Island, South Carolina and NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final point differential. 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]]
"Clearing the Air: Sniffing Out the Link Between Air Pollution and Lacrosse Point Differential on Hilton Head Island"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This investigative study delves into the relationship between air pollution levels on Hilton Head Island, South Carolina, and the point differential in the NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final. Leveraging data acquired from the Environmental Protection Agency and the NCAA for the years 1981 to 1993, we used statistical analyses to scrutinize this peculiar association.

After meticulously sifting through the data, our research team uncovered a rather "airy" correlation coefficient of 0.7419540 and p < 0.01, indicating a noteworthy link between the two variables. Our findings suggest that higher air pollution levels may be associated with greater point differentials in the championship game. It seems that the old adage "a breath of fresh air" might not just be a turn of phrase after all.

Additionally, our research also revealed a surprising pattern in the data, prompting us to ask: "What do you call a respiratory therapist who becomes a lacrosse coach? An "in-haler"!"

In conclusion, our study sheds light on the unanticipated connection between air quality and lacrosse performance, emphasizing the need for further exploration of environmental factors in sports outcomes. We hope this research will encourage future investigations into the "atmospheric advantage" in athletic competitions.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
Air pollution has long been recognized as a significant environmental and public health concern, but its influence on sports performance remains a relatively unexplored area of research. The unique microcosm of Hilton Head Island, South Carolina, provides an intriguing setting to investigate the potential effects of air quality on athletic outcomes. As we embark on this academic adventure, we cannot help but ponder: "Why did the air pollution scientist bring a basketball to the conference? Because he heard they were discussing 'air quality'!"
The NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final serves as an ideal platform for observing high-stakes athletic competition, where every goal can tip the scales of victory. Our curiosity piqued, we sought to examine whether the proverbial "winds of change" in air quality might also impact the final point differentials in this esteemed event. Eager to unearth correlations, we began our analysis with keen interest and a pun at the ready: "Why did the lacrosse team refuse to play in the smog? They didn't want to 'choke'!"
Our investigation aims to contribute to the growing body of knowledge on the intersection of environmental factors and athletic performance. By focusing on a sport known for its fast-paced and physically demanding nature, we seek to pinpoint potential links between air pollution and competitive outcomes. As we delve into this pressing research question, we are reminded that sometimes, the most unexpected connections can emerge from unlikely sources – much like a surprising punchline in a scientific discussion.

[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of the data revealed a strong and statistically significant correlation between air pollution levels and the point differentials in the NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final on Hilton Head Island, South Carolina, for the years 1981 to 1993. The correlation coefficient of 0.7419540 and an r-squared value of 0.5504957 indicated a robust relationship between these variables. This correlation suggests that air pollution may indeed play a role in influencing the point differentials in this championship event. It seems that in this case, "breathing easy" may lead to a lacrosse victory.
Fig. 1 presents a scatterplot illustrating the noteworthy connection between air pollution levels and the point differentials in the championship final. The plot demonstrates a clear trend, further supporting the findings of a substantial relationship between these variables.
The statistical analyses also indicated a significance level of p < 0.01, providing strong evidence that the observed correlation is not merely by chance. This solidifies the notion that air pollution levels could be associated with the performance outcomes of the NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship. What a "breath of fresh air" for our understanding of environmental influences on sports!
Furthermore, our research findings prompt us to consider the practical implications of these results. Could teams gain a strategic advantage by monitoring air quality and adjusting their game plans accordingly? Perhaps the saying "the winds of change are in the air" takes on a whole new meaning in the realm of competitive athletics.
In light of these discoveries, it is clear that further investigation into the relationship between air pollution and athletic performance is warranted. Our findings may encourage a reevaluation of the environmental factors that shape sports outcomes, highlighting the importance of considering air quality in the competitive landscape. After all, when it comes to achieving victory, every breath counts.
In conclusion, our study highlights the unexpected yet compelling link between air pollution levels and the point differentials in the NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final on Hilton Head Island. These results underscore the need for continued exploration of the impact of environmental conditions on athletic competitions, advancing our understanding of the multifaceted influences on sports performance. It seems that when it comes to the interplay of air quality and lacrosse, there's much more than meets the "eye"!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In summary, our investigation into the connection between air pollution levels on Hilton Head Island, South Carolina, and the point differentials in the NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final for the years 1981 to 1993 has uncovered a rather "airy" correlation. The robust relationship, symbolized by a correlation coefficient of 0.7419540 and p < 0.01, suggests that higher air pollution levels may indeed be associated with greater point differentials in this esteemed lacrosse event. One might even say that the "environmental advantage" is nothing to sneeze at!

Moreover, the scatterplot in Fig. 1 vividly portrays the "air-raising" trend between air pollution levels and point differentials, providing a visual testament to the unexpected connection we've unearthed. It seems that in the world of lacrosse, paying attention to air quality could become a game-changer.

Our research prompts us to ponder: "What did the lacrosse player say when the coach warned about the smoggy conditions? 'I won't let it 'pollute' my performance!'"

Ultimately, our study adds an intriguing dimension to the conversation about environmental influences on athletic outcomes. It emphasizes the need for further inquiry into the "atmospheric advantage" in sports and offers a breath of fresh air in the realm of sports science.

So, in the spirit of this unexpected correlation, we assert that no more research is needed in this area. Because when it comes to air pollution and lacrosse, it seems we've already cleared the air on this topic!


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 Clearing the Air: Sniffing Out the Link Between Air Pollution and Lacrosse Point Differential on Hilton Head Island. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

Journal of Environmental Athletics


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 Clearing the Air: Sniffing Out the Link Between Air Pollution and Lacrosse Point Differential on Hilton Head Island. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Institute for Environmental Athletics 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 Clearing the Air: Sniffing Out the Link Between Air Pollution and Lacrosse Point Differential on Hilton Head Island with an abstract of This investigative study delves into the relationship between air pollution levels on Hilton Head Island, South Carolina, and the point differential in the NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final. Leveraging data acquired from the Environmental Protection Agency and the NCAA for the years 1981 to 1993, we used statistical analyses to scrutinize this peculiar association.
After meticulously sifting through the data, our research team uncovered a rather "airy" correlation coefficient of 0.7419540 and p < 0.01, indicating a noteworthy link between the two variables. Our findings suggest that higher air pollution levels may be associated with greater point differentials in the championship game. It seems that the old adage "a breath of fresh air" might not just be a turn of phrase after all.
Additionally, our research also revealed a surprising pattern in the data, prompting us to ask: "What do you call a respiratory therapist who becomes a lacrosse coach? An "in-haler"!"
In conclusion, our study sheds light on the unanticipated connection between air quality and lacrosse performance, emphasizing the need for further exploration of environmental factors in sports outcomes. We hope this research will encourage future investigations into the "atmospheric advantage" in athletic competitions.

ChatGPT:

Hilton Head Island, South Carolina, air pollution, Lacrosse, NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship, point differential, Environmental Protection Agency data, NCAA data, statistical analysis, correlation coefficient, championship game outcomes, sports performance, environmental factors, athletic competitions, air quality.

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



Random correlation

Discover a new correlation

View all correlations

View all research papers

Report an error


Data details

Air pollution in Hilton Head Island, South Carolina
Detailed data title: Percentage of days with air quality at 'unhealthy for sensitive groups' or worse in Hilton Head Island-Bluffton-Beaufort, SC
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
See what else correlates with Air pollution in Hilton Head Island, South Carolina

NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final point differential
Source: NCAA
See what else correlates with NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final point differential

Correlation r = 0.7419540 (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 = 0.5504957 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 55% of the change in the one variable (i.e., NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final point differential) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Air pollution in Hilton Head Island, South Carolina) over the 13 years from 1981 through 1993.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.0037. 0.0036874350985865545000000000
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 0.74 in 0.37% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 271 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.

[ 0.32, 0.92 ] 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.
1981198219831984198519861987198819891990199119921993
Air pollution in Hilton Head Island, South Carolina (Bad air quality days)0.04516130000000.062256800.25625000.0692308
NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final point differential (Points)12137115112511




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.




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([0.0451613,0,0,0,0,0,0,0.0622568,0,0.25625,0,0,0.0692308,])
array_2 = np.array([1,2,1,3,7,1,1,5,1,12,5,1,1,])
array_1_name = "Air pollution in Hilton Head Island, South Carolina"
array_2_name = "NCAA Men's Lacrosse Div I Championship final point differential"

# 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?

You're the correlation whisperer we needed!


Correlation ID: 3287 · Black Variable ID: 21551 · Red Variable ID: 129
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0