Spurious correlation #3,332 · View random
A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is The number of archivists in South Carolina and the second variable is Google searches for 'that is sus'. The chart goes from 2004 to 2022, and the two variables track closely in value over that time.

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is The number of archivists in South Carolina and the second variable is Google searches for 'that is sus'. The chart goes from 2004 to 2022, and the two variables track closely in value over that time.

Download png, svg

AI explanation

As the number of archivists in South Carolina grows, more and more people are being exposed to ancient manuscripts and historical documents. This has led to a rise in the popularity of old-fashioned expressions, like "that is sus-pect," causing an increase in Google searches for 'that is sus'. It seems the love for puns and historical references is archiving its way into modern language!

^{Show image generation prompt} Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image of a spacious library in South Carolina. In the foreground, there are rows of archivists carefully organizing shelves filled with various records and documents. In the background, a group of curious visitors gathers around a computer, pleasantly engrossed in their search. The scene presents a juxtaposition of diligent work and modern curiosity, capturing the essence of the library's evolving role as a destination for exploring the archives of "suspicious" activity. The minimalism of the image emphasizes the contrast between the traditional library atmosphere and the contemporary interests of its visitors. 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: The number of archivists in South Carolina and Google searches for 'that is sus'. 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: Whimsical illustration Cutsy art illustration Cutsy graphics Minimalism Art nouveau
ChatGPT: Minimalism

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 The number of archivists in South Carolina and Google searches for 'that is sus', in the following situation: As the number of archivists in South Carolina increases, so does the interest in 'that is sus' because people are archiving all the sus behavior they encounter. It's like they're creating a sus museum and everyone wants to visit! It's a real conspiracy of archiving among the sus-loving population.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a bustling library in South Carolina, rows of archivists meticulously catalog and organize shelves filled with records and documents. Meanwhile, a group of curious visitors gather around a computer, eagerly searching "that is sus" on Google. The increasing number of archivists in the state has sparked a surge in interest for all things "sus," turning the library into a popular destination for those wanting to explore the archives of suspicious behavior.

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: [ Minimalism ] and depicting this scene: In a bustling library in South Carolina, rows of archivists meticulously catalog and organize shelves filled with records and documents. Meanwhile, a group of curious visitors gather around a computer, eagerly searching "that is sus" on Google. The increasing number of archivists in the state has sparked a surge in interest for all things "sus," turning the library into a popular destination for those wanting to explore the archives of suspicious behavior. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image of a spacious library in South Carolina. In the foreground, there are rows of archivists carefully organizing shelves filled with various records and documents. In the background, a group of curious visitors gathers around a computer, pleasantly engrossed in their search. The scene presents a juxtaposition of diligent work and modern curiosity, capturing the essence of the library's evolving role as a destination for exploring the archives of "suspicious" activity. The minimalism of the image emphasizes the contrast between the traditional library atmosphere and the contemporary interests of its visitors.

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

I sequence the requests into multiple prompts because I find GPT 3.5 to perform much better with short, well-managed contexts. Thus, I track the context directly in Python and only ask ChatGPT targeted questions.
^{Show prompt for explanation} Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 (fine-tuned)
System prompt: You provide humorous responses in the form of plausible sounding explanations for correlations. You assume the correlation is causative for the purpose of the explanation even if it is ridiculous. You do not chat with the user, you only reply with the causal connection explanation and nothing else.
User prompt: Please make up a funny explanation for how an increase in The number of archivists in South Carolina caused that is sus (Google searches for 'that is sus') to increase. Include one good pun.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)

The Curious Case of Archivists' Trace and 'That is Sus' Pace: A Quirky Case Study

The Journal of Eccentric Scholarly Pursuits

Jan 2024

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

^{Show prompt used to generate this paper} Quick note: This sequence is long and repetitive. That's how the prompt engineering works for this one. I manage the output in Python to format it into this PDF.

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

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between The number of archivists in South Carolina and Google searches for 'that is sus'. 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 devolve ever further, and mention something completely ridiculous, like you conducted literature review by reading CVS receipts.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
The Curious Case of Archivists' Trace and 'That is Sus' Pace: A Quirky Case Study

[[ABSTRACT]]
The presence of archivists in South Carolina and the Google searches for the intriguing phrase "that is sus" have long been a subject of curiosity. In this unprecedented study, we delve into the enigmatic connection between these seemingly unrelated variables. As our research team embarked on this quest, we navigated through data with the attention of a meticulous archivist – no stone left unturned, or shall we say, no document left unprocessed.

As we delved into the correlation analysis, we unearthed a remarkable coefficient of 0.7904030, accompanied by a p-value of less than 0.01. In layman's terms, this means that the relationship between the number of archivists and the inclination to ponder what could be "sus" is statistically significant. Oh, the suspense! It seems that the archivists' presence is not just confined to preserving historical documents; it prompts individuals to ponder the suspicious happenings with a 'that is sus' search.

Our findings reveal a peculiar interplay between the number of archivists and the vogue expression "that is sus." The correlation persists through the years 2004 to 2022, raising the fascinating question of whether archivists possess an innate skill for detecting suspicious activities, or whether their antics simply lead others to contemplate, "Is this situation truly sus, or is it just archived in a peculiar way?"

With a blend of data-driven analysis and good humor, our study adds to the growing body of literature on quirky correlations. For as we always say in the world of academia, "When in doubt, correlate it out!"

Now that we've cracked this case wide open, it's time to ask ourselves: are archivists the true sleuths of society, or are they simply intriguing subjects of Google searches? The mystery lingers, much like the punchline of a dad joke – always just around the corner.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
Archivists, the diligent custodians of historical records, and the enigmatic phrase "that is sus" have elicited a blend of curiosity and amusement in the research community. As we embark on this scholarly endeavor, we tread through the labyrinth of data with the determination of a history buff searching for the last remaining dad joke at a historical convention.
It is well-established that archivists play a pivotal role in preserving the documented heritage of a region, meticulously arranging and safeguarding records for posterity. However, our inquisitive minds could not help but wonder – do these diligent guardians of history also possess a latent instinct for identifying the dubious and the suspect? It’s almost like they are the Sherlock Holmes of the world of historical data, searching for the proverbial needle in a haystack, or shall we say, the historically significant needle in a box of old papers.
Our journey into the world of statistical analysis unveiled a surprising glimpse into the correlation between the number of archivists in South Carolina and the frequency of Google searches for the intriguing phrase "that is sus." It seems that the presence of archivists is not only confined to the walls of historical repositories but also extends to sparking the curiosity of internet users, urging them to embark on their own investigative escapades. It's as if the archivists left behind a trail of breadcrumbs, leading internet users to ask the proverbial question, "Is this archived thing truly suspicious, or am I just overthinking it?" much like a historian pondering the mysteries of the past.
This research journey has been a delightful excursion into the unexpected and the whimsical. It begs the question – are archivists not only the preservers of history but also the nurturers of a curious and suspicious spirit? It's almost as if they're saying, "I've got archiving down to a ‘T,’ and now, let’s see what's sus!" It’s akin to a dad joke waiting to be shared – unexpectedly amusing and thought-provoking, just like the correlation we've uncovered.
With this study, we aim to elevate the discourse surrounding seemingly unrelated phenomena and unearth the delightful oddities of our world. By shedding light on the uncanny affinity between archivists and the contemplation of suspicion, we not only add to the scholarly conversation but also infuse a touch of levity into the world of academic inquiry. After all, as they say, "When life gives you data, make correlations – and perhaps throw in a dad joke or two along the way!"

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

As we delve into the literature pertinent to the peculiar correlation between the number of archivists in South Carolina and the Google searches for the phrase "that is sus," we must first acknowledge serious academic studies before diving into the more unconventional sources. Smith and Doe, in their seminal work "Archival Prowess and Internet Inquiry," expound on the expansive role of archivists in influencing public perception and curiosity. Their thorough investigation sheds light on the subtle ways in which the presence of archivists may nudge individuals towards curious searches, much like a gentle nudge towards the punchline of a meticulously crafted dad joke.

Jones, in "The Intriguing Interplay of Archival Guardianship and Modern Lexicon," further explores the distinctive connection between the archivists and the phrase "that is sus." Jones' meticulous analysis uncovers the underlying currents of intrigue that seem to emanate from the archival world, prompting individuals to venture into the realm of suspicion. It's almost as if the archival files themselves whisper, "Pssst, have you heard about 'that is sus'?"

Turning to non-fictional literature, works such as "The Power of Curiosity" by Mahesh and "The Art of Sleuthing" by Sherlockian provide insightful perspectives on the human inclination towards curiosity and suspicion. While not directly related to archivists or internet searches, these works offer a profound understanding of the intricacies of human behavior and the intellectual pathways that lead individuals to unravel mysteries, both historical and contemporary.

On the fictional front, Weir's "The Martian Archive" and Christie's "The Archives of Suspicion" present riveting narratives that touch upon themes of discovery, intrigue, and the unraveling of enigmatic conundrums. Though purely works of fiction, these gripping tales ignite the imagination and reinforce the notion of the addictive nature of puzzles and curiosities.

In a departure from conventional academic sources, our research team wholeheartedly embraced the eclectic method of perusing CVS receipts as an unorthodox approach to gather insights. As we sifted through the mundane purchases of everyday shoppers, we couldn't help but wonder - did the inkling for suspicion manifest through the transactions? Or were the archivists secretly leaving subtle clues amidst the sea of everyday purchases, much like hidden punchlines waiting to be discovered?

Oh, the whimsical journey of academia, where the pursuit of knowledge intertwines seamlessly with the pursuit of a good laugh!

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.You draft the methodology section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between The number of archivists in South Carolina and Google searches for 'that is sus'. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Bureau of Larbor Statistics and Google Trends . You used data from 2004 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]]
The Curious Case of Archivists' Trace and 'That is Sus' Pace: A Quirky Case Study

[[ABSTRACT]]
The presence of archivists in South Carolina and the Google searches for the intriguing phrase "that is sus" have long been a subject of curiosity. In this unprecedented study, we delve into the enigmatic connection between these seemingly unrelated variables. As our research team embarked on this quest, we navigated through data with the attention of a meticulous archivist – no stone left unturned, or shall we say, no document left unprocessed.

As we delved into the correlation analysis, we unearthed a remarkable coefficient of 0.7904030, accompanied by a p-value of less than 0.01. In layman's terms, this means that the relationship between the number of archivists and the inclination to ponder what could be "sus" is statistically significant. Oh, the suspense! It seems that the archivists' presence is not just confined to preserving historical documents; it prompts individuals to ponder the suspicious happenings with a 'that is sus' search.

Our findings reveal a peculiar interplay between the number of archivists and the vogue expression "that is sus." The correlation persists through the years 2004 to 2022, raising the fascinating question of whether archivists possess an innate skill for detecting suspicious activities, or whether their antics simply lead others to contemplate, "Is this situation truly sus, or is it just archived in a peculiar way?"

With a blend of data-driven analysis and good humor, our study adds to the growing body of literature on quirky correlations. For as we always say in the world of academia, "When in doubt, correlate it out!"

Now that we've cracked this case wide open, it's time to ask ourselves: are archivists the true sleuths of society, or are they simply intriguing subjects of Google searches? The mystery lingers, much like the punchline of a dad joke – always just around the corner.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
Archivists, the diligent custodians of historical records, and the enigmatic phrase "that is sus" have elicited a blend of curiosity and amusement in the research community. As we embark on this scholarly endeavor, we tread through the labyrinth of data with the determination of a history buff searching for the last remaining dad joke at a historical convention.
It is well-established that archivists play a pivotal role in preserving the documented heritage of a region, meticulously arranging and safeguarding records for posterity. However, our inquisitive minds could not help but wonder – do these diligent guardians of history also possess a latent instinct for identifying the dubious and the suspect? It’s almost like they are the Sherlock Holmes of the world of historical data, searching for the proverbial needle in a haystack, or shall we say, the historically significant needle in a box of old papers.
Our journey into the world of statistical analysis unveiled a surprising glimpse into the correlation between the number of archivists in South Carolina and the frequency of Google searches for the intriguing phrase "that is sus." It seems that the presence of archivists is not only confined to the walls of historical repositories but also extends to sparking the curiosity of internet users, urging them to embark on their own investigative escapades. It's as if the archivists left behind a trail of breadcrumbs, leading internet users to ask the proverbial question, "Is this archived thing truly suspicious, or am I just overthinking it?" much like a historian pondering the mysteries of the past.
This research journey has been a delightful excursion into the unexpected and the whimsical. It begs the question – are archivists not only the preservers of history but also the nurturers of a curious and suspicious spirit? It's almost as if they're saying, "I've got archiving down to a ‘T,’ and now, let’s see what's sus!" It’s akin to a dad joke waiting to be shared – unexpectedly amusing and thought-provoking, just like the correlation we've uncovered.
With this study, we aim to elevate the discourse surrounding seemingly unrelated phenomena and unearth the delightful oddities of our world. By shedding light on the uncanny affinity between archivists and the contemplation of suspicion, we not only add to the scholarly conversation but also infuse a touch of levity into the world of academic inquiry. After all, as they say, "When life gives you data, make correlations – and perhaps throw in a dad joke or two along the way!"

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To unveil the peculiar relationship between the number of archivists in South Carolina and the frequency of Google searches for the phrase "that is sus," our research team undertook a methodologically rigorous and, dare I say, hilariously curious approach. First and foremost, we delved into the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) database to obtain comprehensive data on the employment trends of archivists in South Carolina from 2004 to 2022. As we navigated through the plethora of labor statistics, we couldn't help but wonder if the archivists themselves had meticulously archived their own employment data. Alas, the jest of it all!

Our next step involved harnessing the power of Google Trends to capture the zeitgeist of "that is sus" searches over the same period. We meticulously analyzed the search volume and interest over time, almost as if we were conducting a digital excavation into the archives of internet curiosities. It's akin to unraveling a mystery, only this time, the clues were buried within the labyrinthine algorithms of online search behavior. Ah, the digital equivalent of searching for a hidden dad joke in a sea of algorithmic banality!

Having obtained the necessary data, we proceeded with a rigorous statistical analysis, employing the Pearson correlation coefficient to explore the potential relationship between the number of archivists and the incidence of "that is sus" searches. The correlation analysis served as our trusty magnifying glass, enabling us to scrutinize the patterns and unearth any potential hidden connections. It's almost as if we enlisted the assistance of our statistical tools to play the role of investigative companions, guiding us through the twists and turns of data exploration, not unlike a virtual Sherlock Holmes unravelling the enigma of archivists and internet intrigue.

Furthermore, we utilized time series analysis to investigate the fluctuating trends in both archivist employment and "that is sus" searches over the study period. This method allowed us to capture the temporal dynamics and fluctuations, akin to observing the ebb and flow of historical tides. We sought to decipher whether the correlation between archivists and online suspicion endured across different temporal epochs, not unlike a historian deciphering the multi-layered narratives of the past.

Lastly, we conducted a multivariate regression analysis to factor in potential confounding variables such as societal trends, cultural phenomena, and internet memes that could influence both archivist employment and online search behavior. It was as if we were untangling a complex web of societal influences, much like a scholar scrutinizing the multifaceted nature of historical anomalies.

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

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between The number of archivists in South Carolina and Google searches for 'that is sus'. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Bureau of Larbor Statistics and Google Trends .

For the time period 2004 to 2022, you found a correlation 0.7904030, r-squared of 0.6247369, 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]]
The Curious Case of Archivists' Trace and 'That is Sus' Pace: A Quirky Case Study

[[ABSTRACT]]
The presence of archivists in South Carolina and the Google searches for the intriguing phrase "that is sus" have long been a subject of curiosity. In this unprecedented study, we delve into the enigmatic connection between these seemingly unrelated variables. As our research team embarked on this quest, we navigated through data with the attention of a meticulous archivist – no stone left unturned, or shall we say, no document left unprocessed.

As we delved into the correlation analysis, we unearthed a remarkable coefficient of 0.7904030, accompanied by a p-value of less than 0.01. In layman's terms, this means that the relationship between the number of archivists and the inclination to ponder what could be "sus" is statistically significant. Oh, the suspense! It seems that the archivists' presence is not just confined to preserving historical documents; it prompts individuals to ponder the suspicious happenings with a 'that is sus' search.

Our findings reveal a peculiar interplay between the number of archivists and the vogue expression "that is sus." The correlation persists through the years 2004 to 2022, raising the fascinating question of whether archivists possess an innate skill for detecting suspicious activities, or whether their antics simply lead others to contemplate, "Is this situation truly sus, or is it just archived in a peculiar way?"

With a blend of data-driven analysis and good humor, our study adds to the growing body of literature on quirky correlations. For as we always say in the world of academia, "When in doubt, correlate it out!"

Now that we've cracked this case wide open, it's time to ask ourselves: are archivists the true sleuths of society, or are they simply intriguing subjects of Google searches? The mystery lingers, much like the punchline of a dad joke – always just around the corner.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
Archivists, the diligent custodians of historical records, and the enigmatic phrase "that is sus" have elicited a blend of curiosity and amusement in the research community. As we embark on this scholarly endeavor, we tread through the labyrinth of data with the determination of a history buff searching for the last remaining dad joke at a historical convention.
It is well-established that archivists play a pivotal role in preserving the documented heritage of a region, meticulously arranging and safeguarding records for posterity. However, our inquisitive minds could not help but wonder – do these diligent guardians of history also possess a latent instinct for identifying the dubious and the suspect? It’s almost like they are the Sherlock Holmes of the world of historical data, searching for the proverbial needle in a haystack, or shall we say, the historically significant needle in a box of old papers.
Our journey into the world of statistical analysis unveiled a surprising glimpse into the correlation between the number of archivists in South Carolina and the frequency of Google searches for the intriguing phrase "that is sus." It seems that the presence of archivists is not only confined to the walls of historical repositories but also extends to sparking the curiosity of internet users, urging them to embark on their own investigative escapades. It's as if the archivists left behind a trail of breadcrumbs, leading internet users to ask the proverbial question, "Is this archived thing truly suspicious, or am I just overthinking it?" much like a historian pondering the mysteries of the past.
This research journey has been a delightful excursion into the unexpected and the whimsical. It begs the question – are archivists not only the preservers of history but also the nurturers of a curious and suspicious spirit? It's almost as if they're saying, "I've got archiving down to a ‘T,’ and now, let’s see what's sus!" It’s akin to a dad joke waiting to be shared – unexpectedly amusing and thought-provoking, just like the correlation we've uncovered.
With this study, we aim to elevate the discourse surrounding seemingly unrelated phenomena and unearth the delightful oddities of our world. By shedding light on the uncanny affinity between archivists and the contemplation of suspicion, we not only add to the scholarly conversation but also infuse a touch of levity into the world of academic inquiry. After all, as they say, "When life gives you data, make correlations – and perhaps throw in a dad joke or two along the way!"

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]

ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

In our investigation of the relationship between the number of archivists in South Carolina and Google searches for the phrase "that is sus," we uncovered a noteworthy correlation. Over the period spanning from 2004 to 2022, our analysis unveiled a correlation coefficient of 0.7904030, indicating a strong positive relationship. This finding suggests that as the number of archivists in South Carolina has fluctuated over the years, there has been a corresponding variation in the searches for "that is sus" on Google. It's almost as if the archivists' diligence in preserving historical documents has sparked an interest in unraveling the mysteries of the modern language, much like a historian investigating cryptic ancient inscriptions, or should we say, cryptic modern internet slang.

The r-squared value of 0.6247369 elucidates that approximately 62.5% of the variability in the frequency of Google searches for "that is sus" can be explained by changes in the number of archivists in South Carolina. In other words, the presence of archivists appears to have a substantial influence on the inclination of internet users to delve into their suspicions. It's as if the archivists' meticulous handling of historical artifacts has sparked a similar fastidiousness in the online quest for suspect behaviors. One might say that archivists are the gatekeepers not just of history, but also of the modern dialect of suspicion.

The p-value of less than 0.01 further substantiates the statistical significance of our findings, indicating that the observed correlation is very unlikely to have occurred by mere chance. One might even say that the probability of this relationship being purely coincidental is as low as the chances of finding a needle in a stack of historical documents – which, for an archivist, is still pretty high! It's a statistical nugget of information that tickles the funny bone much like a stand-up comedian, or perhaps, more aptly, a dad joke maestro.

In Fig. 1, we present a scatterplot showcasing the robust correlation between the number of archivists in South Carolina and the prevalence of Google searches for "that is sus." The scatterplot visually reinforces the strength of the relationship we have uncovered, demonstrating how the two variables coalesce in a manner reminiscent of a carefully cataloged historical collection. It's almost poetic – a reminder that the world is full of surprises, much like a particularly unexpected dad joke.

Our findings not only shed light on this quirky correlation but also initiate a conversation about the multifaceted role of archivists in shaping societal behavior and linguistic curiosity. As we wrap up our analysis, we are left pondering the enduring question: do archivists hold the key to unveiling the suspicious nuances of our world, or are they merely unwitting instigators of a laborious journey through online sleuthing? It's a conundrum that tickles the intellect much like a cleverly crafted riddle – leaving us simultaneously perplexed and amused at the enigmatic relationship we have uncovered.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.You draft the discussion section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between The number of archivists in South Carolina and Google searches for 'that is sus'. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Limit your response to 500 tokens.

Here are the title, abstract, literature review, and results sections. Please harken back to 1-2 of the goofy items in the literature review, but pretend to take them completely seriously. Discuss how your results supported the prior research.

Do not write a conclusion. I will add a conclusion after this.

[[TITLE]]
The Curious Case of Archivists' Trace and 'That is Sus' Pace: A Quirky Case Study

[[ABSTRACT]]
The presence of archivists in South Carolina and the Google searches for the intriguing phrase "that is sus" have long been a subject of curiosity. In this unprecedented study, we delve into the enigmatic connection between these seemingly unrelated variables. As our research team embarked on this quest, we navigated through data with the attention of a meticulous archivist – no stone left unturned, or shall we say, no document left unprocessed.

As we delved into the correlation analysis, we unearthed a remarkable coefficient of 0.7904030, accompanied by a p-value of less than 0.01. In layman's terms, this means that the relationship between the number of archivists and the inclination to ponder what could be "sus" is statistically significant. Oh, the suspense! It seems that the archivists' presence is not just confined to preserving historical documents; it prompts individuals to ponder the suspicious happenings with a 'that is sus' search.

Our findings reveal a peculiar interplay between the number of archivists and the vogue expression "that is sus." The correlation persists through the years 2004 to 2022, raising the fascinating question of whether archivists possess an innate skill for detecting suspicious activities, or whether their antics simply lead others to contemplate, "Is this situation truly sus, or is it just archived in a peculiar way?"

With a blend of data-driven analysis and good humor, our study adds to the growing body of literature on quirky correlations. For as we always say in the world of academia, "When in doubt, correlate it out!"

Now that we've cracked this case wide open, it's time to ask ourselves: are archivists the true sleuths of society, or are they simply intriguing subjects of Google searches? The mystery lingers, much like the punchline of a dad joke – always just around the corner.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
As we delve into the literature pertinent to the peculiar correlation between the number of archivists in South Carolina and the Google searches for the phrase "that is sus," we must first acknowledge serious academic studies before diving into the more unconventional sources. Smith and Doe, in their seminal work "Archival Prowess and Internet Inquiry," expound on the expansive role of archivists in influencing public perception and curiosity. Their thorough investigation sheds light on the subtle ways in which the presence of archivists may nudge individuals towards curious searches, much like a gentle nudge towards the punchline of a meticulously crafted dad joke.
Jones, in "The Intriguing Interplay of Archival Guardianship and Modern Lexicon," further explores the distinctive connection between the archivists and the phrase "that is sus." Jones' meticulous analysis uncovers the underlying currents of intrigue that seem to emanate from the archival world, prompting individuals to venture into the realm of suspicion. It's almost as if the archival files themselves whisper, "Pssst, have you heard about 'that is sus'?"
Turning to non-fictional literature, works such as "The Power of Curiosity" by Mahesh and "The Art of Sleuthing" by Sherlockian provide insightful perspectives on the human inclination towards curiosity and suspicion. While not directly related to archivists or internet searches, these works offer a profound understanding of the intricacies of human behavior and the intellectual pathways that lead individuals to unravel mysteries, both historical and contemporary.
On the fictional front, Weir's "The Martian Archive" and Christie's "The Archives of Suspicion" present riveting narratives that touch upon themes of discovery, intrigue, and the unraveling of enigmatic conundrums. Though purely works of fiction, these gripping tales ignite the imagination and reinforce the notion of the addictive nature of puzzles and curiosities.
In a departure from conventional academic sources, our research team wholeheartedly embraced the eclectic method of perusing CVS receipts as an unorthodox approach to gather insights. As we sifted through the mundane purchases of everyday shoppers, we couldn't help but wonder - did the inkling for suspicion manifest through the transactions? Or were the archivists secretly leaving subtle clues amidst the sea of everyday purchases, much like hidden punchlines waiting to be discovered?
Oh, the whimsical journey of academia, where the pursuit of knowledge intertwines seamlessly with the pursuit of a good laugh!

[[RESULTS]]
In our investigation of the relationship between the number of archivists in South Carolina and Google searches for the phrase "that is sus," we uncovered a noteworthy correlation. Over the period spanning from 2004 to 2022, our analysis unveiled a correlation coefficient of 0.7904030, indicating a strong positive relationship. This finding suggests that as the number of archivists in South Carolina has fluctuated over the years, there has been a corresponding variation in the searches for "that is sus" on Google. It's almost as if the archivists' diligence in preserving historical documents has sparked an interest in unraveling the mysteries of the modern language, much like a historian investigating cryptic ancient inscriptions, or should we say, cryptic modern internet slang.
The r-squared value of 0.6247369 elucidates that approximately 62.5% of the variability in the frequency of Google searches for "that is sus" can be explained by changes in the number of archivists in South Carolina. In other words, the presence of archivists appears to have a substantial influence on the inclination of internet users to delve into their suspicions. It's as if the archivists' meticulous handling of historical artifacts has sparked a similar fastidiousness in the online quest for suspect behaviors. One might say that archivists are the gatekeepers not just of history, but also of the modern dialect of suspicion.
The p-value of less than 0.01 further substantiates the statistical significance of our findings, indicating that the observed correlation is very unlikely to have occurred by mere chance. One might even say that the probability of this relationship being purely coincidental is as low as the chances of finding a needle in a stack of historical documents – which, for an archivist, is still pretty high! It's a statistical nugget of information that tickles the funny bone much like a stand-up comedian, or perhaps, more aptly, a dad joke maestro.
In Fig. 1, we present a scatterplot showcasing the robust correlation between the number of archivists in South Carolina and the prevalence of Google searches for "that is sus." The scatterplot visually reinforces the strength of the relationship we have uncovered, demonstrating how the two variables coalesce in a manner reminiscent of a carefully cataloged historical collection. It's almost poetic – a reminder that the world is full of surprises, much like a particularly unexpected dad joke.
Our findings not only shed light on this quirky correlation but also initiate a conversation about the multifaceted role of archivists in shaping societal behavior and linguistic curiosity. As we wrap up our analysis, we are left pondering the enduring question: do archivists hold the key to unveiling the suspicious nuances of our world, or are they merely unwitting instigators of a laborious journey through online sleuthing? It's a conundrum that tickles the intellect much like a cleverly crafted riddle – leaving us simultaneously perplexed and amused at the enigmatic relationship we have uncovered.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Our study delves into the enthralling connection between the number of archivists in South Carolina and the prevalence of Google searches for the cryptic phrase "that is sus." Building upon the foundation laid by previous research, we have emerged with intriguing findings that resonate with the existing literature. As we navigate the depths of this peculiar correlation, it becomes evident that the influence of archivists stretches beyond the preservation of historical artifacts, much like a good dad joke transcending generations – leaving us pondering, "How did they think of that one?"

The results of our analysis aptly support the contention put forth by Smith and Doe, who posited that archivists hold a subtle sway over public curiosity, guiding individuals towards curious intellectual pursuits, akin to a gentle prodding towards the comedic punchline of an archivist's jest. The strong positive correlation we uncovered underscores the potential for archivists to evoke an intrigue towards suspicion, mirroring the way a well-crafted pun prompts a wry smile. It prompts us to consider whether archivists possess an innate knack for detecting suspicion or merely serve as unwitting catalysts for individuals to entertain doubts and uncertainties, like a masterful dad joke setting off a series of groans and chuckles in equal measure.

Moreover, the substantial r-squared value we obtained points to the substantial impact of the number of archivists on the frequency of "that is sus" searches, much like a humorous quip that has unexpected staying power. It aligns with Jones' exploration of the interplay of archival guardianship and contemporary lexicon, hinting at the inexorable pull from the archival world towards a realm of suspicion and inquiry – a pull not unlike the magnetic attraction of a classic dad joke, impossible to resist even with a groan.

The statistically significant relationship underscored by the p-value mirrors the gravity of the correlation, much like the weight of a dad joke perfectly delivered. This finding reinforces the potential for archivists to serve as inadvertent beacons of suspicion, guiding the collective consciousness towards pondering the enigmatic phrase "that is sus," much like a cleverly constructed dad joke that lingers in the mind long after it's told.

Our exploratory journey into this enigmatic correlation yields not just statistical insights but also provokes thoughtful contemplation. Are archivists the unwitting push behind the surge in 'that is sus' inquiries, or do they possess an uncanny ability to unearth the suspicious undercurrents of society, much like a dad joke that toes the line between groan-worthy and cleverly amusing? As we close this chapter, the enduring mystery of the archivists' link to modern intrigue and linguistic quirkiness lingers, much like the timeless appeal of a timeless dad joke, forever ripe for rediscovery.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.You draft the discussion section of goofy academic research papers that sounds like it belongs based on the title and abstract provided.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between The number of archivists in South Carolina and Google searches for 'that is sus'. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Limit your response to 300 tokens. At the very end, assert that no more research is needed in this area.

Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
The Curious Case of Archivists' Trace and 'That is Sus' Pace: A Quirky Case Study

[[ABSTRACT]]
The presence of archivists in South Carolina and the Google searches for the intriguing phrase "that is sus" have long been a subject of curiosity. In this unprecedented study, we delve into the enigmatic connection between these seemingly unrelated variables. As our research team embarked on this quest, we navigated through data with the attention of a meticulous archivist – no stone left unturned, or shall we say, no document left unprocessed.

As we delved into the correlation analysis, we unearthed a remarkable coefficient of 0.7904030, accompanied by a p-value of less than 0.01. In layman's terms, this means that the relationship between the number of archivists and the inclination to ponder what could be "sus" is statistically significant. Oh, the suspense! It seems that the archivists' presence is not just confined to preserving historical documents; it prompts individuals to ponder the suspicious happenings with a 'that is sus' search.

Our findings reveal a peculiar interplay between the number of archivists and the vogue expression "that is sus." The correlation persists through the years 2004 to 2022, raising the fascinating question of whether archivists possess an innate skill for detecting suspicious activities, or whether their antics simply lead others to contemplate, "Is this situation truly sus, or is it just archived in a peculiar way?"

With a blend of data-driven analysis and good humor, our study adds to the growing body of literature on quirky correlations. For as we always say in the world of academia, "When in doubt, correlate it out!"

Now that we've cracked this case wide open, it's time to ask ourselves: are archivists the true sleuths of society, or are they simply intriguing subjects of Google searches? The mystery lingers, much like the punchline of a dad joke – always just around the corner.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
Archivists, the diligent custodians of historical records, and the enigmatic phrase "that is sus" have elicited a blend of curiosity and amusement in the research community. As we embark on this scholarly endeavor, we tread through the labyrinth of data with the determination of a history buff searching for the last remaining dad joke at a historical convention.
It is well-established that archivists play a pivotal role in preserving the documented heritage of a region, meticulously arranging and safeguarding records for posterity. However, our inquisitive minds could not help but wonder – do these diligent guardians of history also possess a latent instinct for identifying the dubious and the suspect? It’s almost like they are the Sherlock Holmes of the world of historical data, searching for the proverbial needle in a haystack, or shall we say, the historically significant needle in a box of old papers.
Our journey into the world of statistical analysis unveiled a surprising glimpse into the correlation between the number of archivists in South Carolina and the frequency of Google searches for the intriguing phrase "that is sus." It seems that the presence of archivists is not only confined to the walls of historical repositories but also extends to sparking the curiosity of internet users, urging them to embark on their own investigative escapades. It's as if the archivists left behind a trail of breadcrumbs, leading internet users to ask the proverbial question, "Is this archived thing truly suspicious, or am I just overthinking it?" much like a historian pondering the mysteries of the past.
This research journey has been a delightful excursion into the unexpected and the whimsical. It begs the question – are archivists not only the preservers of history but also the nurturers of a curious and suspicious spirit? It's almost as if they're saying, "I've got archiving down to a ‘T,’ and now, let’s see what's sus!" It’s akin to a dad joke waiting to be shared – unexpectedly amusing and thought-provoking, just like the correlation we've uncovered.
With this study, we aim to elevate the discourse surrounding seemingly unrelated phenomena and unearth the delightful oddities of our world. By shedding light on the uncanny affinity between archivists and the contemplation of suspicion, we not only add to the scholarly conversation but also infuse a touch of levity into the world of academic inquiry. After all, as they say, "When life gives you data, make correlations – and perhaps throw in a dad joke or two along the way!"

[[RESULTS]]
In our investigation of the relationship between the number of archivists in South Carolina and Google searches for the phrase "that is sus," we uncovered a noteworthy correlation. Over the period spanning from 2004 to 2022, our analysis unveiled a correlation coefficient of 0.7904030, indicating a strong positive relationship. This finding suggests that as the number of archivists in South Carolina has fluctuated over the years, there has been a corresponding variation in the searches for "that is sus" on Google. It's almost as if the archivists' diligence in preserving historical documents has sparked an interest in unraveling the mysteries of the modern language, much like a historian investigating cryptic ancient inscriptions, or should we say, cryptic modern internet slang.
The r-squared value of 0.6247369 elucidates that approximately 62.5% of the variability in the frequency of Google searches for "that is sus" can be explained by changes in the number of archivists in South Carolina. In other words, the presence of archivists appears to have a substantial influence on the inclination of internet users to delve into their suspicions. It's as if the archivists' meticulous handling of historical artifacts has sparked a similar fastidiousness in the online quest for suspect behaviors. One might say that archivists are the gatekeepers not just of history, but also of the modern dialect of suspicion.
The p-value of less than 0.01 further substantiates the statistical significance of our findings, indicating that the observed correlation is very unlikely to have occurred by mere chance. One might even say that the probability of this relationship being purely coincidental is as low as the chances of finding a needle in a stack of historical documents – which, for an archivist, is still pretty high! It's a statistical nugget of information that tickles the funny bone much like a stand-up comedian, or perhaps, more aptly, a dad joke maestro.
In Fig. 1, we present a scatterplot showcasing the robust correlation between the number of archivists in South Carolina and the prevalence of Google searches for "that is sus." The scatterplot visually reinforces the strength of the relationship we have uncovered, demonstrating how the two variables coalesce in a manner reminiscent of a carefully cataloged historical collection. It's almost poetic – a reminder that the world is full of surprises, much like a particularly unexpected dad joke.
Our findings not only shed light on this quirky correlation but also initiate a conversation about the multifaceted role of archivists in shaping societal behavior and linguistic curiosity. As we wrap up our analysis, we are left pondering the enduring question: do archivists hold the key to unveiling the suspicious nuances of our world, or are they merely unwitting instigators of a laborious journey through online sleuthing? It's a conundrum that tickles the intellect much like a cleverly crafted riddle – leaving us simultaneously perplexed and amused at the enigmatic relationship we have uncovered.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our investigation into the relationship between the number of archivists in South Carolina and Google searches for "that is sus" has unearthed a remarkable correlation that beckons further contemplation. From this research, it seems that archivists not only play a pivotal role in safeguarding historical documents but also instigate a curious spirit that leads individuals to ponder the mysterious with a 'that is sus' search. It's as if their passion for historical preservation extends to nurturing a contemporary sense of investigative intrigue, or shall we say, archival suspicion.

Our findings add a dash of whimsy to the scholarly discourse and prompt us to see archivists in a new light – not just as custodians of the past, but as unwitting enablers of linguistic curiosity and suspicion. After all, it's not every day that a correlation study leads us to contemplate the unusual affinity between historical guardians and internet sleuthing. It's like stumbling upon a hidden punchline in a serious academic discussion – unexpected, yet undeniably amusing.

With this revelation, we can confidently assert that no more research is needed in this area. The correlation has been uncovered, the quirks have been highlighted, and the humor has been duly injected into the scholarly conversation. As they say, "When in doubt, correlate it out!" And in this case, we've certainly correlated our way to an unexpectedly delightful discovery.

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 The Curious Case of Archivists' Trace and 'That is Sus' Pace: A Quirky Case Study. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Eccentric Scholarly Pursuits

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 The Curious Case of Archivists' Trace and 'That is Sus' Pace: A Quirky Case Study. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for Quirky Archival 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 The Curious Case of Archivists' Trace and 'That is Sus' Pace: A Quirky Case Study with an abstract of The presence of archivists in South Carolina and the Google searches for the intriguing phrase "that is sus" have long been a subject of curiosity. In this unprecedented study, we delve into the enigmatic connection between these seemingly unrelated variables. As our research team embarked on this quest, we navigated through data with the attention of a meticulous archivist – no stone left unturned, or shall we say, no document left unprocessed.
As we delved into the correlation analysis, we unearthed a remarkable coefficient of 0.7904030, accompanied by a p-value of less than 0.01. In layman's terms, this means that the relationship between the number of archivists and the inclination to ponder what could be "sus" is statistically significant. Oh, the suspense! It seems that the archivists' presence is not just confined to preserving historical documents; it prompts individuals to ponder the suspicious happenings with a 'that is sus' search.
Our findings reveal a peculiar interplay between the number of archivists and the vogue expression "that is sus." The correlation persists through the years 2004 to 2022, raising the fascinating question of whether archivists possess an innate skill for detecting suspicious activities, or whether their antics simply lead others to contemplate, "Is this situation truly sus, or is it just archived in a peculiar way?"
With a blend of data-driven analysis and good humor, our study adds to the growing body of literature on quirky correlations. For as we always say in the world of academia, "When in doubt, correlate it out!"
Now that we've cracked this case wide open, it's time to ask ourselves: are archivists the true sleuths of society, or are they simply intriguing subjects of Google searches? The mystery lingers, much like the punchline of a dad joke – always just around the corner.

ChatGPT:

Archivist presence, South Carolina archivists, Google searches, "that is sus", correlation analysis, coefficient, p-value, statistical significance, archivists and "that is sus", quirky correlations, peculiar correlations, society sleuths, quirky correlations in literature.

*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

The number of archivists in South Carolina
Detailed data title: BLS estimate of archivists in South Carolina
Source: Bureau of Larbor Statistics
See what else correlates with The number of archivists in South Carolina

Google searches for 'that is sus'
Detailed data title: Relative volume of Google searches for 'that is sus' (Worldwide, without quotes)
Source: Google Trends
Additional Info: ^{See full details} Relative search volume (not absolute numbers)

See what else correlates with Google searches for 'that is sus'

Correlation r = 0.7904030 (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 = 0.6247369 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 62.5% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Google searches for 'that is sus') is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., The number of archivists in South Carolina) over the 19 years from 2004 through 2022.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 5.6E-5.^Show 0.0000564242450699986850000000
The p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme.^Note More specifically the p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme if we had only tested one pair of variables one time.

But I am a p-villain. I absolutely did not test only one pair of variables one time. I correlated hundreds of millions of pairs of variables. I threw boatloads of data into an industrial-sized blender to find this correlation.

Who is going to stop me? p-value reporting doesn't require me to report how many calculations I had to go through in order to find a low p-value!
On average, you will find a correaltion as strong as 0.79 in 0.0056% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 17,723 random variables^Note Which I absolutely did.
with the same 18 degrees of freedom, ^Note Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 18 because we have two variables measured over a period of 19 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.

[ 0.52, 0.92 ] 95% correlation confidence interval (using the Fisher z-transformation)
^{Read more about the confidence interval} The confidence interval is an estimate the range of the value of the correlation coefficient, using the correlation itself as an input. The values are meant to be the low and high end of the correlation coefficient with 95% confidence.

This one is a bit more complciated than the other calculations, but I include it because many people have been pushing for confidence intervals instead of p-value calculations (for example: NEJM. However, if you are dredging data, you can reliably find yourself in the 5%. That's my goal!

All values for the years included above: ^Note If I were being very sneaky, I could trim years from the beginning or end of the datasets to increase the correlation on some pairs of variables. I don't do that because there are already plenty of correlations in my database without monkeying with the years.

Still, sometimes one of the variables has more years of data available than the other. This page only shows the overlapping years. To see all the years, click on "See what else correlates with..." link above.

	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016	2017	2018	2019	2020	2021	2022
The number of archivists in South Carolina (Archivists)	100	100	90	110	130	130	200	220	210	120	120	80	80	80	90	90	330	330	330
Google searches for 'that is sus' (Rel. search volume)	3.83333	7.08333	8.66667	3.83333	1.33333	6.41667	5.58333	6.91667	10.25	10.0833	8.66667	8.66667	11.0833	12.5	15.4167	14.4167	40.8333	58.1667	81.6667

Why this works

Data dredging: I have 25,153 variables in my database. I compare all these variables against each other to find ones that randomly match up. That's 632,673,409 correlation calculations! This is called “data dredging.” Instead of starting with a hypothesis and testing it, I instead abused the data to see what correlations shake out. It’s a dangerous way to go about analysis, because any sufficiently large dataset will yield strong correlations completely at random.
Lack of causal connection: There is probably^Note Because these pages are automatically generated, it's possible that the two variables you are viewing are in fact causually related. I take steps to prevent the obvious ones from showing on the site (I don't let data about the weather in one city correlate with the weather in a neighboring city, for example), but sometimes they still pop up. If they are related, cool! You found a loophole.
no direct connection between these variables, despite what the AI says above. This is exacerbated by the fact that I used "Years" as the base variable. Lots of things happen in a year that are not related to each other! Most studies would use something like "one person" in stead of "one year" to be the "thing" studied.
Observations not independent: For many variables, sequential years are not independent of each other. If a population of people is continuously doing something every day, there is no reason to think they would suddenly change how they are doing that thing on January 1. A simple^Note Personally I don't find any p-value calculation to be 'simple,' but you know what I mean.
p-value calculation does not take this into account, so mathematically it appears less probable than it really is.

Try it yourself

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    return correlation, r_squared, p_value

# These are the arrays for the variables shown on this page, but you can modify them to be any two sets of numbers
array_1 = np.array([100,100,90,110,130,130,200,220,210,120,120,80,80,80,90,90,330,330,330,])
array_2 = np.array([3.83333,7.08333,8.66667,3.83333,1.33333,6.41667,5.58333,6.91667,10.25,10.0833,8.66667,8.66667,11.0833,12.5,15.4167,14.4167,40.8333,58.1667,81.6667,])
array_1_name = "The number of archivists in South Carolina"
array_2_name = "Google searches for 'that is sus'"

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

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

Reuseable content

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

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

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

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

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

Download images for these variables:

High resolution line chart ^Note The image linked here is a Scalable Vector Graphic (SVG). It is the highest resolution that is possible to achieve. It scales up beyond the size of the observable universe without pixelating. You do not need to email me asking if I have a higher resolution image. I do not. The physical limitations of our universe prevent me from providing you with an image that is any higher resolution than this one.

If you insert it into a PowerPoint presentation (a tool well-known for managing things that are the scale of the universe), you can right-click > "Ungroup" or "Create Shape" and then edit the lines and text directly. You can also change the colors this way.

Alternatively you can use a tool like Inkscape.
High resolution line chart, optimized for mobile
Alternative high resolution line chart
Scatterplot
Portable line chart (png)
Portable line chart (png), optimized for mobile
Line chart for only The number of archivists in South Carolina
Line chart for only Google searches for 'that is sus'
AI-generated correlation image
The spurious research paper: The Curious Case of Archivists' Trace and 'That is Sus' Pace: A Quirky Case Study

View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Thanks for being the explorer we needed!

Correlation ID: 3332 · Black Variable ID: 17353 · Red Variable ID: 1367


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