about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #3,381 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Biomass power generated in Singapore and the second variable is Number of Lawyers in the United States.  The chart goes from 1990 to 2021, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

The heat generated from burning plant matter for power in Singapore somehow led to a surge in the reproduction rate of a species of highly ambitious and legally inclined super mosquitoes. These mosquitoes, upon reaching the United States, bit individuals, injecting them with a strong desire to pursue a career in law. As a result, the number of lawyers in the United States increased. The legal world may soon have to grapple with a whole new meaning to the phrase "environmental law."

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie, featuring a bustling furniture workshop in the United States. The workshop is situated amidst lush bamboo groves, with the vibrant greenery painted by the enhanced biomass power in Singapore. Within the workshop, diligent craftsmen and craftswomen are seen carefully shaping and assembling sleek, eco-friendly bamboo furniture. In the background, a group of enthusiastic lawyers are engaged in a discussion about environmental law, drawn to the protection of the trendy bamboo furnishings. 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: Biomass power generated in Singapore and Number of Lawyers in the United States. 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: a Polaroid photo Glitch art Surrealism a meme An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie
ChatGPT: An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie

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 Biomass power generated in Singapore and Number of Lawyers in the United States, in the following situation: As the level of Biomass power generated in Singapore increased, it led to a boom in the production of bamboo, which was used to make hip, eco-friendly furniture in the United States, attracting more lawyers to environmental law to protect the integrity of the trendy new furnishings.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: Picture a bustling furniture workshop in the United States, where sleek, eco-friendly bamboo furniture is being crafted. The workshop is surrounded by vibrant bamboo groves, all grown from the increased biomass power in Singapore. Meanwhile, in the background, a group of enthusiastic lawyers are discussing environmental law, drawn to the protection of the trendy bamboo furnishings.

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: [ An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie ] and depicting this scene: Picture a bustling furniture workshop in the United States, where sleek, eco-friendly bamboo furniture is being crafted. The workshop is surrounded by vibrant bamboo groves, all grown from the increased biomass power in Singapore. Meanwhile, in the background, a group of enthusiastic lawyers are discussing environmental law, drawn to the protection of the trendy bamboo furnishings. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie, featuring a bustling furniture workshop in the United States. The workshop is situated amidst lush bamboo groves, with the vibrant greenery painted by the enhanced biomass power in Singapore. Within the workshop, diligent craftsmen and craftswomen are seen carefully shaping and assembling sleek, eco-friendly bamboo furniture. In the background, a group of enthusiastic lawyers are engaged in a discussion about environmental law, drawn to the protection of the trendy bamboo furnishings.

*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 an increase in Biomass power generated in Singapore caused Number of Lawyers in the United States to increase.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Biomass Power and Bar Exams: Unearthing the Legal Energy Equation

Journal of Legal Energy Studies

Jan 2024

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




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

Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Biomass power generated in Singapore and Number of Lawyers in the United States. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Make the title punny if you can come up with clever pun. If not, just make it sound clever.

Your research team used data from Energy Information Administration and ABA to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9491793 and p < 0.01 for 1990 to 2021.

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]]
"Biomass Power and Bar Exams: Unearthing the Legal Energy Equation"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the curious relationship between biomass power generation in Singapore and the number of lawyers in the United States. Employing data from the Energy Information Administration and the American Bar Association, we sought to shed light on this unconventional linkage. By employing sophisticated statistical analyses, we discovered a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9491793, and the p-value falling below 0.01 for the period from 1990 to 2021. While the causative mechanisms underlying this association remain enigmatic, our findings compel further exploration into the interplay between legal practitioners and sustainable energy sources. The implications of our research transcend mere coincidence, hinting at a legal-energetic synergy that begs for further investigation.


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

Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Biomass power generated in Singapore and Number of Lawyers in the United States. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Biomass Power and Bar Exams: Unearthing the Legal Energy Equation"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the curious relationship between biomass power generation in Singapore and the number of lawyers in the United States. Employing data from the Energy Information Administration and the American Bar Association, we sought to shed light on this unconventional linkage. By employing sophisticated statistical analyses, we discovered a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9491793, and the p-value falling below 0.01 for the period from 1990 to 2021. While the causative mechanisms underlying this association remain enigmatic, our findings compel further exploration into the interplay between legal practitioners and sustainable energy sources. The implications of our research transcend mere coincidence, hinting at a legal-energetic synergy that begs for further investigation.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

The intersection of biomass power and legal practitioners may seem, at first glance, to be as incongruous as a lawyer in a lumberyard. However, our investigation aims to unearth the remarkable correlation between these seemingly disparate entities. Biomass power has gained traction as a sustainable energy source, often overshadowed by its flashier counterparts such as solar and wind power. Meanwhile, the legal profession, much like an overzealous litigator in a courtroom, has seen steady growth in the number of practicing lawyers over the years.

This paper seeks to peel back the layers of this enigmatic relationship, to delve into what may lie beneath the surface, akin to a legal brief with a hidden clause. Meticulously utilizing data from the Energy Information Administration and the American Bar Association, coupled with the magnifying glass of sophisticated statistical analyses, we have uncovered a surprising correlation coefficient that would make any lawyer proud. The numerical dance of 0.9491793 has left us questioning whether biomass power and lawyers are secretly penning some unspoken legal-energetic contract. Furthermore, our p-value has descended below the customary threshold of 0.01, as if providing us with a legal injunction to delve deeper into this intriguing matter.

The discovery of this unexpected correlation has had us scratching our heads more vigorously than a legal scholar wrestling with a complex legal doctrine. While the reasons for this linkage remain shrouded in mystery, it is evident that there exists a curious interaction between the legal profession and sustainable energy sources, much like the elusive articulation of a legal loophole. Our findings beckon for further scrutiny, as if a legal case teetering on the edge of a landmark judgment.

Through this research, we hope to uncover the legal-energetic equation that lies beneath the surface, much like a lawyer delving into the depths of a complex legal case. The implications of this nexus extend beyond mere statistical curiosity, hinting at a hidden legal-energetic synergy that could illuminate new vistas in both the legal and energy sectors. Thus, we invite the reader to embark on this scholarly journey with us, a journey that promises to be more intriguing than a legal argument in a courtroom.


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

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Biomass power generated in Singapore and Number of Lawyers in the United States. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

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

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

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Biomass Power and Bar Exams: Unearthing the Legal Energy Equation"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the curious relationship between biomass power generation in Singapore and the number of lawyers in the United States. Employing data from the Energy Information Administration and the American Bar Association, we sought to shed light on this unconventional linkage. By employing sophisticated statistical analyses, we discovered a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9491793, and the p-value falling below 0.01 for the period from 1990 to 2021. While the causative mechanisms underlying this association remain enigmatic, our findings compel further exploration into the interplay between legal practitioners and sustainable energy sources. The implications of our research transcend mere coincidence, hinting at a legal-energetic synergy that begs for further investigation.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The intersection of biomass power and legal practitioners may seem, at first glance, to be as incongruous as a lawyer in a lumberyard. However, our investigation aims to unearth the remarkable correlation between these seemingly disparate entities. Biomass power has gained traction as a sustainable energy source, often overshadowed by its flashier counterparts such as solar and wind power. Meanwhile, the legal profession, much like an overzealous litigator in a courtroom, has seen steady growth in the number of practicing lawyers over the years.
This paper seeks to peel back the layers of this enigmatic relationship, to delve into what may lie beneath the surface, akin to a legal brief with a hidden clause. Meticulously utilizing data from the Energy Information Administration and the American Bar Association, coupled with the magnifying glass of sophisticated statistical analyses, we have uncovered a surprising correlation coefficient that would make any lawyer proud. The numerical dance of 0.9491793 has left us questioning whether biomass power and lawyers are secretly penning some unspoken legal-energetic contract. Furthermore, our p-value has descended below the customary threshold of 0.01, as if providing us with a legal injunction to delve deeper into this intriguing matter.
The discovery of this unexpected correlation has had us scratching our heads more vigorously than a legal scholar wrestling with a complex legal doctrine. While the reasons for this linkage remain shrouded in mystery, it is evident that there exists a curious interaction between the legal profession and sustainable energy sources, much like the elusive articulation of a legal loophole. Our findings beckon for further scrutiny, as if a legal case teetering on the edge of a landmark judgment.
Through this research, we hope to uncover the legal-energetic equation that lies beneath the surface, much like a lawyer delving into the depths of a complex legal case. The implications of this nexus extend beyond mere statistical curiosity, hinting at a hidden legal-energetic synergy that could illuminate new vistas in both the legal and energy sectors. Thus, we invite the reader to embark on this scholarly journey with us, a journey that promises to be more intriguing than a legal argument in a courtroom.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

A cursory survey of the existing literature on the correlation between biomass power generation in Singapore and the number of lawyers in the United States reveals a landscape as diverse as a legal brief adorned with footnotes. Smith et al. (2017) conducted a comprehensive analysis of sustainable energy sources and their potential impact on legal employment trends, shedding light on the intricate connection between renewable energy and the legal profession. Intriguingly, their findings hinted at a relationship more entwined than a convoluted legal argument, beckoning for further exploration.

Doe (2019) provided a thought-provoking discourse on the intertwining fates of biomass power and the legal demographic, illuminating the subject with insights as unexpected as a surprise witness in the courtroom. The study's conclusions teased at hidden dynamics, suggesting that the legal-energetic interface may be more intricate than a labyrinthine legal code. Jones (2020) scrutinized the statistical undercurrents of sustainable energy and legal practitioner trends, unearthing a correlation as arresting as a courtroom revelation.

Turning to broader scholarly discussions, "Green Energy and Legal Journeys" by Green (2015) presented an interdisciplinary analysis on the ramifications of sustainable energy sources on legal employment patterns, offering a landscape as varied as a legal jurisdiction. In a similar vein, "Renewable Energy and Lawyerly Labyrinths" by Renewable (2018) offered a provocative exploration of the interplay between renewable energy sources and legal career dynamics, weaving a narrative as intriguing as a legal thriller.

On a more lighthearted note, fictional works such as "The Lawyer Who Lit the Biomass" by Legalicus (2005) and "The Energized Attorney" by Powerhouse (2011) introduced whimsical tales of legal practitioners entangled in the world of sustainable energy, painting a picture as colorful as a vibrant legal argument. These literary works, while fictional, provide a delightful exploration of the imaginative intersections between legal acumen and renewable energy dynamics.

Furthermore, cinematic depictions such as "The Verdict of Voltaic Ventures" and "The Attorney and the Algae: A Legal Odyssey," while not scholarly per se, offer cinematic explorations of legal-energetic overlays, providing a visual narrative as captivating as a courtroom drama.

In light of the existing literature, it is evident that the relationship between biomass power generation in Singapore and the number of lawyers in the United States is a subject as multifaceted as a legal prism. While the scholarly discussions offer valuable insights, the comical and fictional representations contribute an additional layer of whimsy to this captivating nexus.


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

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Biomass power generated in Singapore and Number of Lawyers in the United States. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Energy Information Administration and ABA . You used data from 1990 to 2021

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]]
"Biomass Power and Bar Exams: Unearthing the Legal Energy Equation"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the curious relationship between biomass power generation in Singapore and the number of lawyers in the United States. Employing data from the Energy Information Administration and the American Bar Association, we sought to shed light on this unconventional linkage. By employing sophisticated statistical analyses, we discovered a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9491793, and the p-value falling below 0.01 for the period from 1990 to 2021. While the causative mechanisms underlying this association remain enigmatic, our findings compel further exploration into the interplay between legal practitioners and sustainable energy sources. The implications of our research transcend mere coincidence, hinting at a legal-energetic synergy that begs for further investigation.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
The intersection of biomass power and legal practitioners may seem, at first glance, to be as incongruous as a lawyer in a lumberyard. However, our investigation aims to unearth the remarkable correlation between these seemingly disparate entities. Biomass power has gained traction as a sustainable energy source, often overshadowed by its flashier counterparts such as solar and wind power. Meanwhile, the legal profession, much like an overzealous litigator in a courtroom, has seen steady growth in the number of practicing lawyers over the years.
This paper seeks to peel back the layers of this enigmatic relationship, to delve into what may lie beneath the surface, akin to a legal brief with a hidden clause. Meticulously utilizing data from the Energy Information Administration and the American Bar Association, coupled with the magnifying glass of sophisticated statistical analyses, we have uncovered a surprising correlation coefficient that would make any lawyer proud. The numerical dance of 0.9491793 has left us questioning whether biomass power and lawyers are secretly penning some unspoken legal-energetic contract. Furthermore, our p-value has descended below the customary threshold of 0.01, as if providing us with a legal injunction to delve deeper into this intriguing matter.
The discovery of this unexpected correlation has had us scratching our heads more vigorously than a legal scholar wrestling with a complex legal doctrine. While the reasons for this linkage remain shrouded in mystery, it is evident that there exists a curious interaction between the legal profession and sustainable energy sources, much like the elusive articulation of a legal loophole. Our findings beckon for further scrutiny, as if a legal case teetering on the edge of a landmark judgment.
Through this research, we hope to uncover the legal-energetic equation that lies beneath the surface, much like a lawyer delving into the depths of a complex legal case. The implications of this nexus extend beyond mere statistical curiosity, hinting at a hidden legal-energetic synergy that could illuminate new vistas in both the legal and energy sectors. Thus, we invite the reader to embark on this scholarly journey with us, a journey that promises to be more intriguing than a legal argument in a courtroom.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To unearth the mystical connection between biomass power generation in Singapore and the number of lawyers in the United States, our research team embarked on an investigative odyssey that would make even the most intrepid legal researcher blush. With a heady mix of quantitative chutzpah and a dash of statistical derring-do, we set out to employ data sources that were more carefully selected than a jury for a high-profile trial.

Data Sources
Our research drew data from the venerable Energy Information Administration (EIA), known for its precise measurements of energy consumption, production, and the occasional gigawatt flux capacitor. Additionally, we turned to the esteemed repository of legal knowledge, the American Bar Association (ABA), which provided us with an extensive array of data on the number of legal practitioners in the United States. These sources, akin to a dynamic legal duo, formed the bedrock of our statistical escapade.

Statistical Analyses
Armed with this wealth of data, we employed statistical methodologies that would make even the most esoteric legal policy seem like a bedtime story. We utilized a sophisticated correlation analysis to unravel the hidden ties between biomass power generation and the number of lawyers, as if navigating the labyrinthine passages of a legal code. Furthermore, we calculated a correlation coefficient with such precision and finesse that it left us feeling like we had unearthed an ancient legal relic. Our statistical techniques, reminiscent of a seasoned legal mind building a case, allowed us to quantify the strength and direction of the relationship, akin to the exhaustive cross-examination of a key witness.

Time Frame
Our investigation spanned the years from 1990 to 2021, allowing us to capture the ebb and flow of both biomass power generation and the legal profession. This expansive temporal domain gave us the breadth of data needed to detect patterns that would have eluded even the most perspicacious legal researcher.

As our data gathering and statistical analyses took shape, it became evident that our research was akin to a legal drama unfolding in a spirited courtroom. Our methodologies, while unconventional, have paved the way for shedding light on this peculiar association between biomass power generation in Singapore and the number of lawyers in the United States.


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

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Biomass power generated in Singapore and Number of Lawyers in the United States. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Energy Information Administration and ABA .

For the time period 1990 to 2021, you found a correlation 0.9491793, r-squared of 0.9009414, 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]]
"Biomass Power and Bar Exams: Unearthing the Legal Energy Equation"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the curious relationship between biomass power generation in Singapore and the number of lawyers in the United States. Employing data from the Energy Information Administration and the American Bar Association, we sought to shed light on this unconventional linkage. By employing sophisticated statistical analyses, we discovered a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9491793, and the p-value falling below 0.01 for the period from 1990 to 2021. While the causative mechanisms underlying this association remain enigmatic, our findings compel further exploration into the interplay between legal practitioners and sustainable energy sources. The implications of our research transcend mere coincidence, hinting at a legal-energetic synergy that begs for further investigation.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
The intersection of biomass power and legal practitioners may seem, at first glance, to be as incongruous as a lawyer in a lumberyard. However, our investigation aims to unearth the remarkable correlation between these seemingly disparate entities. Biomass power has gained traction as a sustainable energy source, often overshadowed by its flashier counterparts such as solar and wind power. Meanwhile, the legal profession, much like an overzealous litigator in a courtroom, has seen steady growth in the number of practicing lawyers over the years.
This paper seeks to peel back the layers of this enigmatic relationship, to delve into what may lie beneath the surface, akin to a legal brief with a hidden clause. Meticulously utilizing data from the Energy Information Administration and the American Bar Association, coupled with the magnifying glass of sophisticated statistical analyses, we have uncovered a surprising correlation coefficient that would make any lawyer proud. The numerical dance of 0.9491793 has left us questioning whether biomass power and lawyers are secretly penning some unspoken legal-energetic contract. Furthermore, our p-value has descended below the customary threshold of 0.01, as if providing us with a legal injunction to delve deeper into this intriguing matter.
The discovery of this unexpected correlation has had us scratching our heads more vigorously than a legal scholar wrestling with a complex legal doctrine. While the reasons for this linkage remain shrouded in mystery, it is evident that there exists a curious interaction between the legal profession and sustainable energy sources, much like the elusive articulation of a legal loophole. Our findings beckon for further scrutiny, as if a legal case teetering on the edge of a landmark judgment.
Through this research, we hope to uncover the legal-energetic equation that lies beneath the surface, much like a lawyer delving into the depths of a complex legal case. The implications of this nexus extend beyond mere statistical curiosity, hinting at a hidden legal-energetic synergy that could illuminate new vistas in both the legal and energy sectors. Thus, we invite the reader to embark on this scholarly journey with us, a journey that promises to be more intriguing than a legal argument in a courtroom.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The statistical analysis of the data revealed a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9491793 between biomass power generation in Singapore and the number of lawyers in the United States. This result suggests a strong positive relationship between these two seemingly unrelated variables, akin to the connection between a lawyer and their coffee.

Furthermore, the r-squared value of 0.9009414 indicated that approximately 90.09% of the variation in the number of lawyers in the United States can be explained by the variation in biomass power generation in Singapore. It seems that the legal world truly has an energetic influence that extends across the globe.

The p-value of less than 0.01 underscored the significance of this correlation, providing evidence that the likelihood of observing such a strong association between biomass power and the legal profession by mere chance is as rare as an attorney who loves math.

The scatterplot (Fig. 1) visually depicts this robust correlation, serving as a testament to the surprising unity between legal matters and sustainable energy sources. It appears that this legal-energetic equation is more than just a figment of our statistical imagination; it is as real as a courthouse on a bustling Monday morning.

These findings prompt us to consider the underlying forces driving this unexpected relationship with the same zeal as a lawyer crafting a compelling argument. It seems that the legal eagles soaring above the courtroom might also have a subtle influence on the energy landscape, blending the worlds of jurisprudence and renewable energy in a way that prompts us to question the very fabric of this legal-energetic tapestry.

In conclusion, this research offers a tantalizing glimpse into the intertwining realms of law and energy, hinting at a symbiotic connection that transcends traditional disciplinary boundaries. The legal-energetic equation unveiled in this study presents an intriguing conundrum that beckons for further exploration, challenging us to uncover the full extent of this captivating alliance.


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

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Biomass power generated in Singapore and Number of Lawyers in the United States. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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]]
"Biomass Power and Bar Exams: Unearthing the Legal Energy Equation"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the curious relationship between biomass power generation in Singapore and the number of lawyers in the United States. Employing data from the Energy Information Administration and the American Bar Association, we sought to shed light on this unconventional linkage. By employing sophisticated statistical analyses, we discovered a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9491793, and the p-value falling below 0.01 for the period from 1990 to 2021. While the causative mechanisms underlying this association remain enigmatic, our findings compel further exploration into the interplay between legal practitioners and sustainable energy sources. The implications of our research transcend mere coincidence, hinting at a legal-energetic synergy that begs for further investigation.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
A cursory survey of the existing literature on the correlation between biomass power generation in Singapore and the number of lawyers in the United States reveals a landscape as diverse as a legal brief adorned with footnotes. Smith et al. (2017) conducted a comprehensive analysis of sustainable energy sources and their potential impact on legal employment trends, shedding light on the intricate connection between renewable energy and the legal profession. Intriguingly, their findings hinted at a relationship more entwined than a convoluted legal argument, beckoning for further exploration.
Doe (2019) provided a thought-provoking discourse on the intertwining fates of biomass power and the legal demographic, illuminating the subject with insights as unexpected as a surprise witness in the courtroom. The study's conclusions teased at hidden dynamics, suggesting that the legal-energetic interface may be more intricate than a labyrinthine legal code. Jones (2020) scrutinized the statistical undercurrents of sustainable energy and legal practitioner trends, unearthing a correlation as arresting as a courtroom revelation.
Turning to broader scholarly discussions, "Green Energy and Legal Journeys" by Green (2015) presented an interdisciplinary analysis on the ramifications of sustainable energy sources on legal employment patterns, offering a landscape as varied as a legal jurisdiction. In a similar vein, "Renewable Energy and Lawyerly Labyrinths" by Renewable (2018) offered a provocative exploration of the interplay between renewable energy sources and legal career dynamics, weaving a narrative as intriguing as a legal thriller.
On a more lighthearted note, fictional works such as "The Lawyer Who Lit the Biomass" by Legalicus (2005) and "The Energized Attorney" by Powerhouse (2011) introduced whimsical tales of legal practitioners entangled in the world of sustainable energy, painting a picture as colorful as a vibrant legal argument. These literary works, while fictional, provide a delightful exploration of the imaginative intersections between legal acumen and renewable energy dynamics.
Furthermore, cinematic depictions such as "The Verdict of Voltaic Ventures" and "The Attorney and the Algae: A Legal Odyssey," while not scholarly per se, offer cinematic explorations of legal-energetic overlays, providing a visual narrative as captivating as a courtroom drama.
In light of the existing literature, it is evident that the relationship between biomass power generation in Singapore and the number of lawyers in the United States is a subject as multifaceted as a legal prism. While the scholarly discussions offer valuable insights, the comical and fictional representations contribute an additional layer of whimsy to this captivating nexus.

[[RESULTS]]
The statistical analysis of the data revealed a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9491793 between biomass power generation in Singapore and the number of lawyers in the United States. This result suggests a strong positive relationship between these two seemingly unrelated variables, akin to the connection between a lawyer and their coffee.
Furthermore, the r-squared value of 0.9009414 indicated that approximately 90.09% of the variation in the number of lawyers in the United States can be explained by the variation in biomass power generation in Singapore. It seems that the legal world truly has an energetic influence that extends across the globe.
The p-value of less than 0.01 underscored the significance of this correlation, providing evidence that the likelihood of observing such a strong association between biomass power and the legal profession by mere chance is as rare as an attorney who loves math.
The scatterplot (Fig. 1) visually depicts this robust correlation, serving as a testament to the surprising unity between legal matters and sustainable energy sources. It appears that this legal-energetic equation is more than just a figment of our statistical imagination; it is as real as a courthouse on a bustling Monday morning.
These findings prompt us to consider the underlying forces driving this unexpected relationship with the same zeal as a lawyer crafting a compelling argument. It seems that the legal eagles soaring above the courtroom might also have a subtle influence on the energy landscape, blending the worlds of jurisprudence and renewable energy in a way that prompts us to question the very fabric of this legal-energetic tapestry.
In conclusion, this research offers a tantalizing glimpse into the intertwining realms of law and energy, hinting at a symbiotic connection that transcends traditional disciplinary boundaries. The legal-energetic equation unveiled in this study presents an intriguing conundrum that beckons for further exploration, challenging us to uncover the full extent of this captivating alliance.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Our investigation into the remarkable relationship between biomass power generation in Singapore and the number of lawyers in the United States has left us as puzzled as a jury member trying to make sense of a convoluted deliberation. The robust correlation coefficient of 0.9491793 and the p-value below 0.01 attest to a connection as compelling as a closing argument delivered by a charismatic legal luminary. These findings not only support but also elevate the notions proposed in prior research, akin to an appellate court affirming a lower court's decision.

Reflecting on the existing literature, the works of Smith et al. (2017), Doe (2019), and Jones (2020) resonate with our findings more potently than a resonant objection in a courtroom. The intricate dynamics between sustainable energy sources and legal demographics appear to be as enigmatic as a motion filed in the dark. Furthermore, the whimsical elements in the literature, exemplified by Legalicus (2005) and Powerhouse (2011), have not only provided a nod to the imaginative intersections but have also woven a flavorful, albeit fictional, narrative accentuating the complexity of the legal-energetic dialogue.

The literature review, brimming with unexpected twists and lighthearted representations, laid the groundwork for our study in demonstrating that the relationship between biomass power in Singapore and the number of lawyers in the United States is as multifaceted as a legal argument bound in rainbow-colored footnotes. Our results have augmented these existing narratives and culminated in a robust statistical depiction that suggests an enticing union between these domains, as unexpected as finding a gavel in a renewable energy plant.

The visual correlation inferred from the scatterplot (Fig. 1) lends credence to the scholarly and fictional portrayals of the legal-energetic interface, as vivid as a vivid portrayal of a courtroom drama. For, fundamentally, numbers and data do not lie—it seems that the legal world's influence extends beyond the confines of courtrooms, resonating with the pulse of renewable energy. This study, laced with numerical veracity and sprinkled with hints of conundrum, extends the invitation for continued inquiry into this captivating legal-energetic riddle.


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

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Biomass power generated in Singapore and Number of Lawyers in the United States. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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]]
"Biomass Power and Bar Exams: Unearthing the Legal Energy Equation"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the curious relationship between biomass power generation in Singapore and the number of lawyers in the United States. Employing data from the Energy Information Administration and the American Bar Association, we sought to shed light on this unconventional linkage. By employing sophisticated statistical analyses, we discovered a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9491793, and the p-value falling below 0.01 for the period from 1990 to 2021. While the causative mechanisms underlying this association remain enigmatic, our findings compel further exploration into the interplay between legal practitioners and sustainable energy sources. The implications of our research transcend mere coincidence, hinting at a legal-energetic synergy that begs for further investigation.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
The intersection of biomass power and legal practitioners may seem, at first glance, to be as incongruous as a lawyer in a lumberyard. However, our investigation aims to unearth the remarkable correlation between these seemingly disparate entities. Biomass power has gained traction as a sustainable energy source, often overshadowed by its flashier counterparts such as solar and wind power. Meanwhile, the legal profession, much like an overzealous litigator in a courtroom, has seen steady growth in the number of practicing lawyers over the years.
This paper seeks to peel back the layers of this enigmatic relationship, to delve into what may lie beneath the surface, akin to a legal brief with a hidden clause. Meticulously utilizing data from the Energy Information Administration and the American Bar Association, coupled with the magnifying glass of sophisticated statistical analyses, we have uncovered a surprising correlation coefficient that would make any lawyer proud. The numerical dance of 0.9491793 has left us questioning whether biomass power and lawyers are secretly penning some unspoken legal-energetic contract. Furthermore, our p-value has descended below the customary threshold of 0.01, as if providing us with a legal injunction to delve deeper into this intriguing matter.
The discovery of this unexpected correlation has had us scratching our heads more vigorously than a legal scholar wrestling with a complex legal doctrine. While the reasons for this linkage remain shrouded in mystery, it is evident that there exists a curious interaction between the legal profession and sustainable energy sources, much like the elusive articulation of a legal loophole. Our findings beckon for further scrutiny, as if a legal case teetering on the edge of a landmark judgment.
Through this research, we hope to uncover the legal-energetic equation that lies beneath the surface, much like a lawyer delving into the depths of a complex legal case. The implications of this nexus extend beyond mere statistical curiosity, hinting at a hidden legal-energetic synergy that could illuminate new vistas in both the legal and energy sectors. Thus, we invite the reader to embark on this scholarly journey with us, a journey that promises to be more intriguing than a legal argument in a courtroom.

[[RESULTS]]
The statistical analysis of the data revealed a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9491793 between biomass power generation in Singapore and the number of lawyers in the United States. This result suggests a strong positive relationship between these two seemingly unrelated variables, akin to the connection between a lawyer and their coffee.
Furthermore, the r-squared value of 0.9009414 indicated that approximately 90.09% of the variation in the number of lawyers in the United States can be explained by the variation in biomass power generation in Singapore. It seems that the legal world truly has an energetic influence that extends across the globe.
The p-value of less than 0.01 underscored the significance of this correlation, providing evidence that the likelihood of observing such a strong association between biomass power and the legal profession by mere chance is as rare as an attorney who loves math.
The scatterplot (Fig. 1) visually depicts this robust correlation, serving as a testament to the surprising unity between legal matters and sustainable energy sources. It appears that this legal-energetic equation is more than just a figment of our statistical imagination; it is as real as a courthouse on a bustling Monday morning.
These findings prompt us to consider the underlying forces driving this unexpected relationship with the same zeal as a lawyer crafting a compelling argument. It seems that the legal eagles soaring above the courtroom might also have a subtle influence on the energy landscape, blending the worlds of jurisprudence and renewable energy in a way that prompts us to question the very fabric of this legal-energetic tapestry.
In conclusion, this research offers a tantalizing glimpse into the intertwining realms of law and energy, hinting at a symbiotic connection that transcends traditional disciplinary boundaries. The legal-energetic equation unveiled in this study presents an intriguing conundrum that beckons for further exploration, challenging us to uncover the full extent of this captivating alliance.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In elucidating the unexpected correlation between biomass power generation in Singapore and the number of lawyers in the United States, we have unearthed a legal-energetic synergy that defies conventional expectations. The remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9491793, alongside the r-squared value of 0.9009414, and the p-value below 0.01, suggest a connection as solid as a well-crafted legal argument. It appears that the legal world and sustainable energy sources are engaged in a covert dance, mirroring the coordination of a well-oiled legal team. This correlation, while initially as perplexing as a lawyer's attempt at stand-up comedy, signifies an interplay that demands further exploration, much like a legal case with unforeseen twists and turns. As we wrap up our investigation, it is evident that the legal-energetic equation is no mere legal fiction but a substantive relationship that commands attention and curiosity. Our findings tempt us to contemplate the potential ripple effects of this symbiotic alliance, akin to a snowballing legal case. However, after delving into this thought-provoking union, we assert that no further research is needed in this area, saving everyone from an inordinate amount of lawyer jokes and statistical puns.


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 Biomass Power and Bar Exams: Unearthing the Legal Energy Equation. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

Journal of Legal Energy Studies


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of nonprofit research organizations and associations. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding nonprofit, academic, or scientific association or organization that would sponsor research that resulted in a paper entited Biomass Power and Bar Exams: Unearthing the Legal Energy Equation. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for Renewable Energy Law and Policy (SRELP)


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 Biomass Power and Bar Exams: Unearthing the Legal Energy Equation with an abstract of This study delves into the curious relationship between biomass power generation in Singapore and the number of lawyers in the United States. Employing data from the Energy Information Administration and the American Bar Association, we sought to shed light on this unconventional linkage. By employing sophisticated statistical analyses, we discovered a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9491793, and the p-value falling below 0.01 for the period from 1990 to 2021. While the causative mechanisms underlying this association remain enigmatic, our findings compel further exploration into the interplay between legal practitioners and sustainable energy sources. The implications of our research transcend mere coincidence, hinting at a legal-energetic synergy that begs for further investigation.

ChatGPT:

biomass power generation, energy generation, lawyers in the United States, correlation coefficient, statistical analysis, sustainable energy sources, legal-energetic synergy, legal practitioners, biomass power Singapore, American Bar Association, Energy Information Administration

*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

Biomass power generated in Singapore
Detailed data title: Total biomass power generated in Singapore in billion kWh
Source: Energy Information Administration
See what else correlates with Biomass power generated in Singapore

Number of Lawyers in the United States
Detailed data title: The Count of ABA Lawyers in the United States
Source: ABA
See what else correlates with Number of Lawyers in the United States

Correlation r = 0.9491793 (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 = 0.9009414 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 90.1% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Number of Lawyers in the United States) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Biomass power generated in Singapore) over the 32 years from 1990 through 2021.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 1.3E-16. 0.0000000000000001316174733836
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 0.95 in 1.3E-14% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 7,597,775,388,724,362 random variables You don't actually need 7 quadrillion variables to find a correlation like this one. I don't have that many variables in my database. You can also correlate variables that are not independent. I do this a lot.

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

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

Just to be clear: I'm being completely transparent about the calculations. There is no math trickery. This is just how statistics shakes out when you calculate hundreds of millions of random correlations.
with the same 31 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 31 because we have two variables measured over a period of 32 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.

[ 0.9, 0.98 ] 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.
19901991199219931994199519961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172018201920202021
Biomass power generated in Singapore (Billion kWh)0.170.490.490.490.490.490.490.490.490.490.490.9460.9460.990.9580.9180.9540.9741.0481.1581.5171.5461.5751.8351.8651.8591.8691.8181.9011.8741.8221.833
Number of Lawyers in the United States (Lawyers)75569477711979976084603686561489614095326095326098592110004401022460104890010497501058660108450011047701116970114336011621201180390120310012254501245200126801012814301300700131287013359601342380135208013287401327910




Why this works

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




Try it yourself

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

    return correlation, r_squared, p_value

# These are the arrays for the variables shown on this page, but you can modify them to be any two sets of numbers
array_1 = np.array([0.17,0.49,0.49,0.49,0.49,0.49,0.49,0.49,0.49,0.49,0.49,0.946,0.946,0.99,0.958,0.918,0.954,0.974,1.048,1.158,1.517,1.546,1.575,1.835,1.865,1.859,1.869,1.818,1.901,1.874,1.822,1.833,])
array_2 = np.array([755694,777119,799760,846036,865614,896140,953260,953260,985921,1000440,1022460,1048900,1049750,1058660,1084500,1104770,1116970,1143360,1162120,1180390,1203100,1225450,1245200,1268010,1281430,1300700,1312870,1335960,1342380,1352080,1328740,1327910,])
array_1_name = "Biomass power generated in Singapore"
array_2_name = "Number of Lawyers in the United States"

# 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?

Hats off to you for rating!


Correlation ID: 3381 · Black Variable ID: 23966 · Red Variable ID: 542
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0