about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #3,402 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Popularity of the first name Suzanna and the second variable is GMO use in cotton in Missouri.  The chart goes from 2005 to 2022, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As the name Suzanna fell out of favor, fewer people were willing to wear clothing with the monogram "S," leading to a reduced demand for cotton. This ultimately led Missouri cotton farmers to decrease their GMO use in an attempt to balance the market. Remember, sometimes a letter can make all the difference!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image that shows a cheerful group of locals standing next to a cotton field, holding signs that read "Support Non-GMO Cotton." The field is bathed in gentle sunlight, with a clear blue sky in the background and a modest sign that reads "Suzanna's Cotton Farm." In the distance, a fading billboard displays the name "Suzanna" against the peaceful backdrop of the Missouri town. The depiction should include only scenes, people, and objects, it should not include text or speech bubbles.
This image generation prompt was also generated by AI, using the following sequence:

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You select one of a few potential scene descriptors that seems to go along with the variables described. You respond only with the scene descriptions provided and say nothing else.
User prompt: Here are two variables: Popularity of the first name Suzanna and GMO use in cotton in Missouri. 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: Hyper-realistic Cubism Cybernetic art a funny image macro Steampunk
ChatGPT: a funny image macro

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You describe simple visual scenes that depict the two variables stated. You combine both variables into one scene.
User prompt: Please describe a visual scene that prominently depicts both Popularity of the first name Suzanna and GMO use in cotton in Missouri, in the following situation: Decrease in the popularity of the first name Suzanna caused a decrease in GMO use in cotton in Missouri because as Suzanna's popularity waned, so did the desire for things to be "sue-zanna" the way they had been, leading to a shift in preference for non-GMO cotton and an overall decrease in GMO use in the state.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a quaint town in Missouri, a field of cotton sways gently in the breeze under the clear blue sky. Alongside the cotton field, a modest sign reads "Suzanna's Cotton Farm." A group of locals chat excitedly, holding signs that say "Support Non-GMO Cotton." In the distance, the name "Suzanna" is seen in fading letters on a billboard, symbolizing the decreasing popularity of the name.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You write and improve image generation prompts for DALLE-3. You maintain the same subjects, but enhance the visuals.
User prompt: Please respond with an image generation prompt that would be likely to create an interesting visual using DALLE-3, using the following style: [ a funny image macro ] and depicting this scene: In a quaint town in Missouri, a field of cotton sways gently in the breeze under the clear blue sky. Alongside the cotton field, a modest sign reads "Suzanna's Cotton Farm." A group of locals chat excitedly, holding signs that say "Support Non-GMO Cotton." In the distance, the name "Suzanna" is seen in fading letters on a billboard, symbolizing the decreasing popularity of the name. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image that shows a cheerful group of locals standing next to a cotton field, holding signs that read "Support Non-GMO Cotton." The field is bathed in gentle sunlight, with a clear blue sky in the background and a modest sign that reads "Suzanna's Cotton Farm." In the distance, a fading billboard displays the name "Suzanna" against the peaceful backdrop of the Missouri town.

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

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

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 (fine-tuned)
System prompt: You provide humorous responses in the form of plausible sounding explanations for correlations. You assume the correlation is causative for the purpose of the explanation even if it is ridiculous. You do not chat with the user, you only reply with the causal connection explanation and nothing else.
User prompt: Please make up a funny explanation for how a decrease in Popularity of the first name Suzanna caused GMO use in cotton in Missouri to decrease. Add a funny one-liner at the end.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Suzanna-cy in the Cotton Fields: Exploring the Connection between Suzanna Popularity and GMO Use in Missouri

The Journal of Agro-Popular Culture

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 silly 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 Popularity of the first name Suzanna and GMO use in cotton in Missouri. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Include a pun in the title.

Your research team used data from US Social Security Administration and USDA to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.8936303 and p < 0.01 for 2005 to 2022.

Please respond in this format (replace "Lorem ipsum dolor sit" with your title and abstract)

[[TITLE]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit

[[ABSTRACT]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit



ChatGPT:
[[TITLE]]
"Suzanna-cy in the Cotton Fields: Exploring the Connection between Suzanna Popularity and GMO Use in Missouri"

[[ABSTRACT]]
Cotton, GMOs, and baby names - what's the connection? In this study, we delved into the puzzling correlation between the popularity of the first name Suzanna and the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation in the state of Missouri. Using data from the US Social Security Administration and the US Department of Agriculture, we calculated a correlation coefficient of 0.8936303 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 2005 to 2022. Our findings highlight a surprisingly strong association between the two seemingly unrelated variables, raising questions about the whimsical ways in which societal trends and agricultural practices intertwine. Join us on this lighthearted journey through the cotton fields of statistical analysis, where we uncover the unexpected synergy between baby names and biotechnology.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 Popularity of the first name Suzanna and GMO use in cotton in Missouri. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Suzanna-cy in the Cotton Fields: Exploring the Connection between Suzanna Popularity and GMO Use in Missouri"

[[ABSTRACT]]
Cotton, GMOs, and baby names - what's the connection? In this study, we delved into the puzzling correlation between the popularity of the first name Suzanna and the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation in the state of Missouri. Using data from the US Social Security Administration and the US Department of Agriculture, we calculated a correlation coefficient of 0.8936303 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 2005 to 2022. Our findings highlight a surprisingly strong association between the two seemingly unrelated variables, raising questions about the whimsical ways in which societal trends and agricultural practices intertwine. Join us on this lighthearted journey through the cotton fields of statistical analysis, where we uncover the unexpected synergy between baby names and biotechnology.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

Amidst the cotton fields of the Midwest, a peculiar phenomenon has unfolded - one that involves not only the growth of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) but also the proliferation of a particular baby name. Yes, you heard it right - we are about to embark on a unique, whimsical journey through the fields of statistical analysis to uncover the surprising connection between the popularity of the first name Suzanna and GMO use in Missouri.

Now, you might be wondering, "What in the world do baby names have to do with biotechnology?" Believe me, dear reader, you are not alone in your befuddlement. Upon stumbling onto this peculiar correlation, we set out to unravel this conundrum with a blend of curiosity and sheer amusement. Our aim? To shed light on this unexpected union of societal naming trends and agricultural practices and to do so with a healthy dose of good-natured humor.

In an era where discussions about GMOs often evoke impassioned debate and fervent crossfire, we found it refreshing to wade through the data with a lighthearted spirit. So, fasten your seatbelts and get ready to explore the enchanting world of Suzanna-cy in the cotton fields of Missouri. As we delve into our findings, do keep in mind that this journey promises a delightful blend of whimsy, statistical analysis, and perhaps a sprinkle of baby shower humor - after all, we're dealing with a correlation coefficient of 0.8936303 and p < 0.01, which is no small cotton candy in the world of research.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 Popularity of the first name Suzanna and GMO use in cotton in Missouri. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

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

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then cite some social media posts you read that seem to be related.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Suzanna-cy in the Cotton Fields: Exploring the Connection between Suzanna Popularity and GMO Use in Missouri"

[[ABSTRACT]]
Cotton, GMOs, and baby names - what's the connection? In this study, we delved into the puzzling correlation between the popularity of the first name Suzanna and the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation in the state of Missouri. Using data from the US Social Security Administration and the US Department of Agriculture, we calculated a correlation coefficient of 0.8936303 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 2005 to 2022. Our findings highlight a surprisingly strong association between the two seemingly unrelated variables, raising questions about the whimsical ways in which societal trends and agricultural practices intertwine. Join us on this lighthearted journey through the cotton fields of statistical analysis, where we uncover the unexpected synergy between baby names and biotechnology.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
Amidst the cotton fields of the Midwest, a peculiar phenomenon has unfolded - one that involves not only the growth of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) but also the proliferation of a particular baby name. Yes, you heard it right - we are about to embark on a unique, whimsical journey through the fields of statistical analysis to uncover the surprising connection between the popularity of the first name Suzanna and GMO use in Missouri.
Now, you might be wondering, "What in the world do baby names have to do with biotechnology?" Believe me, dear reader, you are not alone in your befuddlement. Upon stumbling onto this peculiar correlation, we set out to unravel this conundrum with a blend of curiosity and sheer amusement. Our aim? To shed light on this unexpected union of societal naming trends and agricultural practices and to do so with a healthy dose of good-natured humor.
In an era where discussions about GMOs often evoke impassioned debate and fervent crossfire, we found it refreshing to wade through the data with a lighthearted spirit. So, fasten your seatbelts and get ready to explore the enchanting world of Suzanna-cy in the cotton fields of Missouri. As we delve into our findings, do keep in mind that this journey promises a delightful blend of whimsy, statistical analysis, and perhaps a sprinkle of baby shower humor - after all, we're dealing with a correlation coefficient of 0.8936303 and p < 0.01, which is no small cotton candy in the world of research.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

As we don our academic spectacles and trot into the realm of existing research, we find ourselves meandering through a thicket of studies that traverse the fields of agriculture, sociology, and baby-naming trends. In "Cotton Cultivation and Genetically Modified Organisms" by Smith et al., the authors elucidate the manifold impacts of GMO use in cotton production, providing a comprehensive overview of the agricultural landscape. Contrarily, Doe's "The Social Significance of Name Popularity" offers a sociological lens through which to scrutinize the ebbs and flows of baby name trends, engendering a profound understanding of the societal ramifications of nomenclature preferences.

However, as we avidly peruse the scholarly landscape, we inevitably stumble upon some unexpected, yet delightfully intriguing, sources that veer off the beaten path. "GMOs: The Latest Cotton Candy?" by Jones oscillates between agricultural discourse and whimsical title choices, while "Societal Ties That Bine: A Twine-tastic Tale of Suzanna and GMOs" by Lorem Ipsum dives into the enigmatic world of name-based agricultural proclivities, twirling linguistic ribbons with agricultural musings.

Indeed, our quest for understanding leads us down a merry rabbit hole of literary pursuits. Fictional works such as "The Cotton Chronicles: A Tale of Biotechnological Botany" by J.K. Growling and "Suzanna and the Curious Case of the Transgenic Cotton Fields" by Agri-Culturalist A. Reader beckon with their fanciful tales, weaving a speculative narrative that dances mirthfully between reality and imagination.

And let us not forget the modern treasure trove of social media, where snippets of wisdom and witticisms converge in curious harmony. A tweet by @CottonCraze2022 cryptically exclaims, "Suzanna's reign is as unyielding as GMO cotton, intertwining a web of 100% pure organic conundrums!" - a statement that simply begs for scholarly perusal, much like a cotton-candy-scented whirlwind urging us to untangle its sugary enigma.

As we traverse this unorthodox and jubilant smorgasbord of sources, we are lured into a harmonious cacophony of curiosity and whimsy, reflecting the multifaceted nature of our enchanting Suzanna-cy in the cotton fields of Missouri.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 Popularity of the first name Suzanna and GMO use in cotton in Missouri. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from US Social Security Administration and USDA . You used data from 2005 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]]
"Suzanna-cy in the Cotton Fields: Exploring the Connection between Suzanna Popularity and GMO Use in Missouri"

[[ABSTRACT]]
Cotton, GMOs, and baby names - what's the connection? In this study, we delved into the puzzling correlation between the popularity of the first name Suzanna and the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation in the state of Missouri. Using data from the US Social Security Administration and the US Department of Agriculture, we calculated a correlation coefficient of 0.8936303 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 2005 to 2022. Our findings highlight a surprisingly strong association between the two seemingly unrelated variables, raising questions about the whimsical ways in which societal trends and agricultural practices intertwine. Join us on this lighthearted journey through the cotton fields of statistical analysis, where we uncover the unexpected synergy between baby names and biotechnology.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
Amidst the cotton fields of the Midwest, a peculiar phenomenon has unfolded - one that involves not only the growth of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) but also the proliferation of a particular baby name. Yes, you heard it right - we are about to embark on a unique, whimsical journey through the fields of statistical analysis to uncover the surprising connection between the popularity of the first name Suzanna and GMO use in Missouri.
Now, you might be wondering, "What in the world do baby names have to do with biotechnology?" Believe me, dear reader, you are not alone in your befuddlement. Upon stumbling onto this peculiar correlation, we set out to unravel this conundrum with a blend of curiosity and sheer amusement. Our aim? To shed light on this unexpected union of societal naming trends and agricultural practices and to do so with a healthy dose of good-natured humor.
In an era where discussions about GMOs often evoke impassioned debate and fervent crossfire, we found it refreshing to wade through the data with a lighthearted spirit. So, fasten your seatbelts and get ready to explore the enchanting world of Suzanna-cy in the cotton fields of Missouri. As we delve into our findings, do keep in mind that this journey promises a delightful blend of whimsy, statistical analysis, and perhaps a sprinkle of baby shower humor - after all, we're dealing with a correlation coefficient of 0.8936303 and p < 0.01, which is no small cotton candy in the world of research.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To unravel the captivating mystery behind the connection between the enchanting first name Suzanna and the cultivation of genetically modified cotton in the heartland of Missouri, our research team utilized a blend of creative data collection methods and statistical analyses. We embarked on this delightful and somewhat whimsical journey armed with a trusty arsenal of databases, including the US Social Security Administration for baby name popularity trends and the US Department of Agriculture for GMO usage in cotton. With data spanning from 2005 to 2022, we aimed to piece together the peculiar puzzle with a mix of mirth and method.

As any intrepid researcher would do, we began our expedition by perusing the labyrinthine halls of the US Social Security Administration's baby name database. Our quest was to unearth the waxing and waning popularity of the name Suzanna over the years, navigating through the digital corridors of baby names with the determination of an Indiana Jones unfurling ancient scrolls. Armed with spreadsheets and caffeinated beverages, we meticulously charted the peaks and valleys of Suzanna's presence in the landscape of newborn nomenclature.

While the baby names database introduced us to the spirited journey of Suzanna's fluctuating popularity, our next port of call led us to the bucolic fields of genetic modification in cotton cultivation. With the USDA as our guide, we delved into the realm of biotechnology, sifting through the data on GMO use in the cotton fields of Missouri. Like intrepid explorers navigating uncharted territories, we meticulously recorded the ebb and flow of genetically modified cotton, seeking to uncover any peculiar correlations with our lighthearted namesake, Suzanna.

Armed with our trusty spreadsheet compass and statistical sextant, we set sail on the sea of data, braving the tempestuous waves of correlation coefficients and significance levels. Embracing the whimsy of our quest, we indulged our curiosity and statistical prowess to calculate the correlation coefficient and associated p-value, ultimately unveiling the unexpectedly robust connection between the popularity of the first name Suzanna and GMO use in cotton cultivation in Missouri.

In the spirit of scientific inquiry infused with humor, our methodologies were a blend of rigorous data collection, statistical analyses, and a dash of playful exploration. Like an engaging theatrical performance, our foray into this unlikely correlation was as informative as it was entertaining, proving yet again that even in the august halls of academia, a touch of jocularity and whimsy can elevate the pursuit of knowledge to new heights.

In summary, our methodology combined a light-hearted approach with robust statistical analysis to shed light on the amusing connection between the first name Suzanna and GMO use in cotton, proving that research endeavors can be as entertaining as they are enlightening.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 Popularity of the first name Suzanna and GMO use in cotton in Missouri. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

For the time period 2005 to 2022, you found a correlation 0.8936303, r-squared of 0.7985751, 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]]
"Suzanna-cy in the Cotton Fields: Exploring the Connection between Suzanna Popularity and GMO Use in Missouri"

[[ABSTRACT]]
Cotton, GMOs, and baby names - what's the connection? In this study, we delved into the puzzling correlation between the popularity of the first name Suzanna and the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation in the state of Missouri. Using data from the US Social Security Administration and the US Department of Agriculture, we calculated a correlation coefficient of 0.8936303 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 2005 to 2022. Our findings highlight a surprisingly strong association between the two seemingly unrelated variables, raising questions about the whimsical ways in which societal trends and agricultural practices intertwine. Join us on this lighthearted journey through the cotton fields of statistical analysis, where we uncover the unexpected synergy between baby names and biotechnology.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
Amidst the cotton fields of the Midwest, a peculiar phenomenon has unfolded - one that involves not only the growth of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) but also the proliferation of a particular baby name. Yes, you heard it right - we are about to embark on a unique, whimsical journey through the fields of statistical analysis to uncover the surprising connection between the popularity of the first name Suzanna and GMO use in Missouri.
Now, you might be wondering, "What in the world do baby names have to do with biotechnology?" Believe me, dear reader, you are not alone in your befuddlement. Upon stumbling onto this peculiar correlation, we set out to unravel this conundrum with a blend of curiosity and sheer amusement. Our aim? To shed light on this unexpected union of societal naming trends and agricultural practices and to do so with a healthy dose of good-natured humor.
In an era where discussions about GMOs often evoke impassioned debate and fervent crossfire, we found it refreshing to wade through the data with a lighthearted spirit. So, fasten your seatbelts and get ready to explore the enchanting world of Suzanna-cy in the cotton fields of Missouri. As we delve into our findings, do keep in mind that this journey promises a delightful blend of whimsy, statistical analysis, and perhaps a sprinkle of baby shower humor - after all, we're dealing with a correlation coefficient of 0.8936303 and p < 0.01, which is no small cotton candy in the world of research.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

We are thrilled to report our findings on the Suzanna-cy in the cotton fields of Missouri. Our data analysis revealed a striking correlation between the popularity of the first name Suzanna and the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation. With a correlation coefficient of 0.8936303 and an r-squared value of 0.7985751, the connection between these two seemingly unrelated phenomena surpassed our expectations.

The statistical significance of our results, with a p-value of less than 0.01, provides strong evidence for the association we observed. Our scatterplot (Fig. 1) vividly illustrates the robust relationship between the variables, leaving little room for doubt or skepticism.

The strong correlation we uncovered prompts us to ponder the whimsical ways in which societal naming trends and agricultural practices intertwine. As researchers, we pride ourselves on unraveling unexpected synergies, and this peculiar correlation certainly adds a charming twist to the world of data analysis.

In summary, our findings not only shed light on the intriguing link between the first name Suzanna and GMO use in Missouri's cotton fields, but they also provide a delightful glimpse into the playful surprises that can emerge from statistical exploration. The cotton candy of data analysis has never tasted sweeter than in this study, where the stitches of humor and curiosity have woven a tapestry of unexpected connections.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 Popularity of the first name Suzanna and GMO use in cotton in Missouri. Make lots of 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]]
"Suzanna-cy in the Cotton Fields: Exploring the Connection between Suzanna Popularity and GMO Use in Missouri"

[[ABSTRACT]]
Cotton, GMOs, and baby names - what's the connection? In this study, we delved into the puzzling correlation between the popularity of the first name Suzanna and the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation in the state of Missouri. Using data from the US Social Security Administration and the US Department of Agriculture, we calculated a correlation coefficient of 0.8936303 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 2005 to 2022. Our findings highlight a surprisingly strong association between the two seemingly unrelated variables, raising questions about the whimsical ways in which societal trends and agricultural practices intertwine. Join us on this lighthearted journey through the cotton fields of statistical analysis, where we uncover the unexpected synergy between baby names and biotechnology.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
As we don our academic spectacles and trot into the realm of existing research, we find ourselves meandering through a thicket of studies that traverse the fields of agriculture, sociology, and baby-naming trends. In "Cotton Cultivation and Genetically Modified Organisms" by Smith et al., the authors elucidate the manifold impacts of GMO use in cotton production, providing a comprehensive overview of the agricultural landscape. Contrarily, Doe's "The Social Significance of Name Popularity" offers a sociological lens through which to scrutinize the ebbs and flows of baby name trends, engendering a profound understanding of the societal ramifications of nomenclature preferences.
However, as we avidly peruse the scholarly landscape, we inevitably stumble upon some unexpected, yet delightfully intriguing, sources that veer off the beaten path. "GMOs: The Latest Cotton Candy?" by Jones oscillates between agricultural discourse and whimsical title choices, while "Societal Ties That Bine: A Twine-tastic Tale of Suzanna and GMOs" by Lorem Ipsum dives into the enigmatic world of name-based agricultural proclivities, twirling linguistic ribbons with agricultural musings.
Indeed, our quest for understanding leads us down a merry rabbit hole of literary pursuits. Fictional works such as "The Cotton Chronicles: A Tale of Biotechnological Botany" by J.K. Growling and "Suzanna and the Curious Case of the Transgenic Cotton Fields" by Agri-Culturalist A. Reader beckon with their fanciful tales, weaving a speculative narrative that dances mirthfully between reality and imagination.
And let us not forget the modern treasure trove of social media, where snippets of wisdom and witticisms converge in curious harmony. A tweet by @CottonCraze2022 cryptically exclaims, "Suzanna's reign is as unyielding as GMO cotton, intertwining a web of 100% pure organic conundrums!" - a statement that simply begs for scholarly perusal, much like a cotton-candy-scented whirlwind urging us to untangle its sugary enigma.
As we traverse this unorthodox and jubilant smorgasbord of sources, we are lured into a harmonious cacophony of curiosity and whimsy, reflecting the multifaceted nature of our enchanting Suzanna-cy in the cotton fields of Missouri.

[[RESULTS]]
We are thrilled to report our findings on the Suzanna-cy in the cotton fields of Missouri. Our data analysis revealed a striking correlation between the popularity of the first name Suzanna and the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation. With a correlation coefficient of 0.8936303 and an r-squared value of 0.7985751, the connection between these two seemingly unrelated phenomena surpassed our expectations.
The statistical significance of our results, with a p-value of less than 0.01, provides strong evidence for the association we observed. Our scatterplot (Fig. 1) vividly illustrates the robust relationship between the variables, leaving little room for doubt or skepticism.
The strong correlation we uncovered prompts us to ponder the whimsical ways in which societal naming trends and agricultural practices intertwine. As researchers, we pride ourselves on unraveling unexpected synergies, and this peculiar correlation certainly adds a charming twist to the world of data analysis.
In summary, our findings not only shed light on the intriguing link between the first name Suzanna and GMO use in Missouri's cotton fields, but they also provide a delightful glimpse into the playful surprises that can emerge from statistical exploration. The cotton candy of data analysis has never tasted sweeter than in this study, where the stitches of humor and curiosity have woven a tapestry of unexpected connections.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

The curious confluence of Suzannas and GMO cotton has spun our heads and sparked a joyful tap dance of statistical whimsy. Our findings bolster the offbeat musings from our literature review, lending credence to the idea that there's more to the name game than meets the eye. While we explored a myriad of sources, from the whimsically titled "GMOs: The Latest Cotton Candy?" to the enigmatic tweet exclaiming about Suzanna's unyielding reign, our results now stand as a jubilant testament to the unexpected connections we uncovered.

Indeed, our correlation coefficient of 0.8936303 waltzes cheekily alongside the literature's playful twirls, affirming the startling association between the popularity of the name Suzanna and GMO usage in Missouri's cotton fields. The statistical significance of our results reinforces the playful notion that there's a robust dance party at play between societal trends and agricultural practices. It seems that the intertwining nature of baby names and biotechnology can yield quite the ceilidh of correlations.

As we reflect on our results, we find ourselves tickled by the fanciful notion that the cotton fields of Missouri have become as tangled as a spool of whimsical twine. The Suzanna-cy we uncovered not only adds flair to our statistical repertoire, but it also injects a dollop of levity into the sometimes stern world of academic research. After all, who would have thought that the seemingly disparate realms of baby naming and agricultural innovation could boogie down together so exuberantly?

In a field where serious inquiry often reigns supreme, our study proudly flaunts its plume of playfulness, proving that even the most unconventional correlations can waltz confidently into the spotlight of statistical scrutiny. So, as we bid adieu to this merry-go-round of Suzanna-cy and GMO cotton, we invite our fellow researchers to heed the boisterous call of unexpected linkages and revel in the jocular marvels that await in the delightful world of data exploration.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 Popularity of the first name Suzanna and GMO use in cotton in Missouri. Make lots of 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]]
"Suzanna-cy in the Cotton Fields: Exploring the Connection between Suzanna Popularity and GMO Use in Missouri"

[[ABSTRACT]]
Cotton, GMOs, and baby names - what's the connection? In this study, we delved into the puzzling correlation between the popularity of the first name Suzanna and the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation in the state of Missouri. Using data from the US Social Security Administration and the US Department of Agriculture, we calculated a correlation coefficient of 0.8936303 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 2005 to 2022. Our findings highlight a surprisingly strong association between the two seemingly unrelated variables, raising questions about the whimsical ways in which societal trends and agricultural practices intertwine. Join us on this lighthearted journey through the cotton fields of statistical analysis, where we uncover the unexpected synergy between baby names and biotechnology.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
Amidst the cotton fields of the Midwest, a peculiar phenomenon has unfolded - one that involves not only the growth of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) but also the proliferation of a particular baby name. Yes, you heard it right - we are about to embark on a unique, whimsical journey through the fields of statistical analysis to uncover the surprising connection between the popularity of the first name Suzanna and GMO use in Missouri.
Now, you might be wondering, "What in the world do baby names have to do with biotechnology?" Believe me, dear reader, you are not alone in your befuddlement. Upon stumbling onto this peculiar correlation, we set out to unravel this conundrum with a blend of curiosity and sheer amusement. Our aim? To shed light on this unexpected union of societal naming trends and agricultural practices and to do so with a healthy dose of good-natured humor.
In an era where discussions about GMOs often evoke impassioned debate and fervent crossfire, we found it refreshing to wade through the data with a lighthearted spirit. So, fasten your seatbelts and get ready to explore the enchanting world of Suzanna-cy in the cotton fields of Missouri. As we delve into our findings, do keep in mind that this journey promises a delightful blend of whimsy, statistical analysis, and perhaps a sprinkle of baby shower humor - after all, we're dealing with a correlation coefficient of 0.8936303 and p < 0.01, which is no small cotton candy in the world of research.

[[RESULTS]]
We are thrilled to report our findings on the Suzanna-cy in the cotton fields of Missouri. Our data analysis revealed a striking correlation between the popularity of the first name Suzanna and the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation. With a correlation coefficient of 0.8936303 and an r-squared value of 0.7985751, the connection between these two seemingly unrelated phenomena surpassed our expectations.
The statistical significance of our results, with a p-value of less than 0.01, provides strong evidence for the association we observed. Our scatterplot (Fig. 1) vividly illustrates the robust relationship between the variables, leaving little room for doubt or skepticism.
The strong correlation we uncovered prompts us to ponder the whimsical ways in which societal naming trends and agricultural practices intertwine. As researchers, we pride ourselves on unraveling unexpected synergies, and this peculiar correlation certainly adds a charming twist to the world of data analysis.
In summary, our findings not only shed light on the intriguing link between the first name Suzanna and GMO use in Missouri's cotton fields, but they also provide a delightful glimpse into the playful surprises that can emerge from statistical exploration. The cotton candy of data analysis has never tasted sweeter than in this study, where the stitches of humor and curiosity have woven a tapestry of unexpected connections.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our study has revealed a delightful confluence of Suzanna-cy and GMO use in the cotton fields of Missouri. The robust correlation we uncovered not only adds a whimsical twist to the world of statistical analysis but also leaves us pondering the mystical forces at play in the realm of baby names and biotechnology. It seems that as the popularity of the name Suzanna blossomed, so did the use of GMOs in cotton cultivation, creating an enchanting duet of societal naming trends and agricultural practices.

As we wrap up this research, we cannot help but marvel at the unexpected synergy we have unveiled. It's as if the cotton plants themselves were whispering the name "Suzanna" amidst the rustling of their genetically modified leaves. The statistical significance of our findings speaks volumes, emphasizing the enchanting dance of data that has unfolded before our very eyes.

It is clear that no stone has been left unturned in this exploration of Suzanna-cy, and we firmly believe that no further investigation is needed in this area. After all, when it comes to the whimsical world of baby names and GMOs, it seems our research has sown the seeds of understanding. So, let us bid adieu to the cotton fields of statistical analysis with a chuckle and a dash of Suzanna-cy, for this playful journey has surely been a cotton-pickin' good time!


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 Suzanna-cy in the Cotton Fields: Exploring the Connection between Suzanna Popularity and GMO Use in Missouri. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Agro-Popular Culture


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 Suzanna-cy in the Cotton Fields: Exploring the Connection between Suzanna Popularity and GMO Use in Missouri. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for Agri-Cultural Analysis and Research (SAFAR)


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 Suzanna-cy in the Cotton Fields: Exploring the Connection between Suzanna Popularity and GMO Use in Missouri with an abstract of Cotton, GMOs, and baby names - what's the connection? In this study, we delved into the puzzling correlation between the popularity of the first name Suzanna and the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation in the state of Missouri. Using data from the US Social Security Administration and the US Department of Agriculture, we calculated a correlation coefficient of 0.8936303 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 2005 to 2022. Our findings highlight a surprisingly strong association between the two seemingly unrelated variables, raising questions about the whimsical ways in which societal trends and agricultural practices intertwine. Join us on this lighthearted journey through the cotton fields of statistical analysis, where we uncover the unexpected synergy between baby names and biotechnology.

ChatGPT:

Suzanna, cotton fields, GMO, Missouri, baby names, correlation coefficient, genetically modified organisms, US Social Security Administration, US Department of Agriculture, agricultural practices, statistical analysis

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



Random correlation

Discover a new correlation

View all correlations

View all research papers

Report an error


Data details

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

GMO use in cotton in Missouri
Detailed data title: Percent of cotton planted in Missouri that is genetically modified to be herbicide-tolerant (HT), but not insect-resistant (Bt)
Source: USDA
See what else correlates with GMO use in cotton in Missouri

Correlation r = 0.8936303 (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 = 0.7985751 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 79.9% of the change in the one variable (i.e., GMO use in cotton in Missouri) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Popularity of the first name Suzanna) over the 18 years from 2005 through 2022.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 5.9E-7. 0.0000005874050377479800000000
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 0.89 in 5.9E-5% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 1,702,403 random variables You don't actually need 1 million 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 17 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 17 because we have two variables measured over a period of 18 years. It's just the number of years minus ( the number of variables minus one ), which in this case simplifies to the number of years minus one.
you would randomly expect to find a correlation as strong as this one.

[ 0.73, 0.96 ] 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.
200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022
Popularity of the first name Suzanna (Babies born)1018895977079798372646260655248494450
GMO use in cotton in Missouri (GMO cotton %)59406368294747325427363436201715724




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([101,88,95,97,70,79,79,83,72,64,62,60,65,52,48,49,44,50,])
array_2 = np.array([59,40,63,68,29,47,47,32,54,27,36,34,36,20,17,15,7,24,])
array_1_name = "Popularity of the first name Suzanna"
array_2_name = "GMO use in cotton in Missouri"

# 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?

Your correlation rating is out of this world!


Correlation ID: 3402 · Black Variable ID: 4048 · Red Variable ID: 785
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0