Spurious correlation #3,422 · View random
A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is GMO use in cotton in California and the second variable is Number of households headed by single fathers in the United States. The chart goes from 2000 to 2021, and the two variables track closely in value over that time.

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is GMO use in cotton in California and the second variable is Number of households headed by single fathers in the United States. The chart goes from 2000 to 2021, and the two variables track closely in value over that time.

AI explanation

As the cotton plants grew bigger thanks to GMOs, they developed an overwhelming need for nurturing. This urge somehow transcended species boundaries, leading to a surge in single father households as the cotton plants sought out human dads to care for them. It seems like genetically modified cotton didn't just stop at being a cash crop; it also became the ultimate plant matchmaker for single fathers across the nation.

^{Show image generation prompt} Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Create an image of a vibrant California cotton field under the clear blue sky, with towering genetically modified cotton plants swaying in the breeze. In the distance, a group of single fathers, exuding strength and resilience, stand tall against the backdrop of the lush cotton field. Each father has gained unique abilities and a sense of empowerment from transformative spider bites caused by GMO-enhanced cotton-eating spiders. Show the fathers in a powerful and determined stance, ready to embrace the challenges of single parenthood. The image should capture the essence of newfound strength and the transformative impact of the genetically modified cotton in the lives of these fathers. 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: GMO use in cotton in California and Number of households headed by single fathers 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: Cute 2D animation An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie Cute 2D animation A TIME magazine cover image A Discovery magazine cover image
ChatGPT: A Discovery magazine cover image

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 GMO use in cotton in California and Number of households headed by single fathers in the United States, in the following situation: Because GMO cotton in California increased, single fathers in the US increased due to the radioactive spider bites from GMO-enhanced cotton-eating spiders mutating human fatherhood genes.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a vast California cotton field, genetically modified cotton plants tower high, their lush green leaves rustling in the breeze. In the distance, a group of single fathers in the United States gather, each with a sense of newfound strength and resilience, a result of the unique radioactive spider bites from GMO-enhanced cotton-eating spiders. Their roles as fathers have been transformed, and they stand tall, ready to embrace the challenges of single parenthood that lie ahead.

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 Discovery magazine cover image ] and depicting this scene: In a vast California cotton field, genetically modified cotton plants tower high, their lush green leaves rustling in the breeze. In the distance, a group of single fathers in the United States gather, each with a sense of newfound strength and resilience, a result of the unique radioactive spider bites from GMO-enhanced cotton-eating spiders. Their roles as fathers have been transformed, and they stand tall, ready to embrace the challenges of single parenthood that lie ahead. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Create an image of a vibrant California cotton field under the clear blue sky, with towering genetically modified cotton plants swaying in the breeze. In the distance, a group of single fathers, exuding strength and resilience, stand tall against the backdrop of the lush cotton field. Each father has gained unique abilities and a sense of empowerment from transformative spider bites caused by GMO-enhanced cotton-eating spiders. Show the fathers in a powerful and determined stance, ready to embrace the challenges of single parenthood. The image should capture the essence of newfound strength and the transformative impact of the genetically modified cotton in the lives of these fathers.

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

I sequence the requests into multiple prompts because I find GPT 3.5 to perform much better with short, well-managed contexts. Thus, I track the context directly in Python and only ask ChatGPT targeted questions.
^{Show prompt for explanation} Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 (fine-tuned)
System prompt: You provide humorous responses in the form of plausible sounding explanations for correlations. You assume the correlation is causative for the purpose of the explanation even if it is ridiculous. You do not chat with the user, you only reply with the causal connection explanation and nothing else.
User prompt: Please make up a funny explanation for how an increase in GMO use in cotton in California caused Number of households headed by single fathers in the United States to increase.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)

GMO Growth: Gleaning the Garish Gauntlet of Genetically Modified Cotton and the Growth of Gracious Guardianship: A Grandiose Governance Gamble

The Journal of Genetically Enhanced Agriculture

Jan 2024

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

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

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton in California and Number of households headed by single fathers in the United States. 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 devolve ever further, and mention something completely ridiculous, like you conducted literature review by reading the backs of shampoo bottles.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
GMO Growth: Gleaning the Garish Gauntlet of Genetically Modified Cotton and the Growth of Gracious Guardianship: A Grandiose Governance Gamble

[[ABSTRACT]]
The association between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in California and the prevalence of households led by single fathers in the United States raises eyebrows and piques curiosity. This study delves into the perplexing correlation, employing USDA and Statista data from 2000 to 2021 to scrutinize this seemingly incongruous connection.

The correlation coefficient of 0.9276714 and p < 0.01 indicates a compelling link, sparking thoughts of GMOs morphing into "Gentlemen Making Offspring." Could it be that GMO-infused cotton somehow bestows super-fathering powers? Or does it merely attract single fathers, drawn in by the allure of scientifically enhanced cotton crops?

While causation remains enigmatic, the correlation between GMO cotton and single fatherhood proves to be a head-turning anomaly, leaving researchers pondering the implications of "GMO: Good Magnet for One-parent households?" This study serves as a catalyst for reimagining the realms of cotton and fatherhood, unveiling a quirky correlation that tantalizes the mind and tickles the funny bone.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The intersection of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton production and the prevalence of households led by single fathers is a perplexing conundrum that has called forth inquisitive minds and raised more than a few eyebrows. This unexpected and seemingly whimsical correlation has spawned a myriad of questions, and the pressing need to uncover the underlying mechanisms has incited a fervent quest for answers.
As researchers tiptoe through the fields of genetic modification and family dynamics, the allure of unraveling this enigma becomes irresistible. The statistical relationship, with a correlation coefficient of 0.9276714 and p < 0.01, beckons us like a tantalizing riddle waiting to be solved. One cannot help but wonder if GMOs hold the secret to the proliferation of single fathers, or if there exists a not-so-subtle relationship between enhanced cotton crops and enthusiastic fatherhood.
This peculiar correlation presents itself as a veritable Pandora's box of possibilities, teasing our scholarly minds with the potential for genetically modified cotton to serve as a beacon, attracting single fathers like moths to a scientifically enhanced flame. The notion of GMOs possibly transmogrifying into "Gentlemen Making Offspring" is nothing short of an amusing flight of fancy that prompts a lighthearted chuckle and a raised eyebrow in equal measure.
Intriguingly, the prospect of causation remains shrouded in mystery, and the quirky dance between GMO-infused cotton and single fatherhood gives rise to an abundance of speculative musings. Could it be that GMOs possess hidden aphrodisiacal properties that draw single fathers like bees to nectar? Or perhaps the allure of scientifically bolstered cotton traverses into the realm of family dynamics, redefining the adage of "sowing one's wild oats" into a waggish interpretation of crop selection and household composition.
This study embarks on a humorous yet earnest journey into the domain of GMOs, cotton, and the underexplored linkage to single fatherhood. As we navigate through the labyrinth of data and statistical analyses, the quirky correlation between GMO cotton and single fatherhood emerges as a beacon of scholarly amusement, offering a refreshing twist in the hallowed halls of agricultural and household research.
In the subsequent sections, we dissect the perplexing web of connections, unravel the layers of this unexpected relationship, and seek to shed light on the whimsical yet thought-provoking intersection of GMO growth and the growth of gracious guardianship. It is our hope that this study will ignite a newfound appreciation for the unexpected marvels that scientific inquiry can uncover and inspire a nod and a smile in the oftentimes solemn landscape of academic research.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

In their exploration of the influence of genetically modified cotton cultivation in California on the prevalence of households led by single fathers in the United States, Smith et al. (2015) unearth a compelling relationship that defies conventional expectations. Similarly, Doe and Jones (2018) delve into the enigmatic correlation between GMO use in agricultural practices and non-traditional family structures, shedding light on the tantalizing intersection of seemingly disparate domains.

Expanding the scope of inquiry beyond academic literature, "GMOs and You: A Guide to Agricultural Advancements" by Agricultural Association presents an in-depth analysis of GMO utilization in cotton farming. Delving further into the broader societal implications, "The Changing Face of American Families" by Family Dynamics Institute offers thought-provoking insights into evolving family structures, providing a contextual backdrop for the present investigation.

Treading the line between fiction and reality, "The Cotton Conundrum" by Jane Fictionwriter and "Fatherhood Fantasies: A Tale of Single Parents" by John Novelest beckon readers into the intricate tapestry of cotton and fatherhood, offering imaginative narratives that echo the perplexing correlation under scrutiny. As the inquiry takes an unexpected turn, "The Enigmatic Efficacy of Eggplants" emerges as an offbeat yet strangely relevant contribution, drawing inspiration from seemingly unrelated agricultural phenomena to tease out unexpected parallels.

Lending an unexpected twist to the conventional sources of literature, a curious turn of events prompts our perusal of unconventional repositories. To our bemusement, the back of a shampoo bottle in a local supermarket aisle discloses an unforeseen revelation regarding the potential impact of genetically modified cotton on family dynamics, prompting an unlikely addition to the annals of scholarly inquiry.

The confluence of diverse sources, both scholarly and whimsical, underscores the multifaceted nature of the relationship between GMO cotton cultivation and single fatherhood. It is amidst this extraordinary juxtaposition that the present investigation seeks to navigate and illuminate the unearthed treasures of knowledge, presenting an amalgamation of quirky findings and scholarly revelations that promise to amuse, entertain, and inspire a newfound appreciation for the absurdities that scholarly inquiry can unearth.

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

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton in California and Number of households headed by single fathers in the United States. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from USDA and Statista . You used data from 2000 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]]
GMO Growth: Gleaning the Garish Gauntlet of Genetically Modified Cotton and the Growth of Gracious Guardianship: A Grandiose Governance Gamble

[[ABSTRACT]]
The association between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in California and the prevalence of households led by single fathers in the United States raises eyebrows and piques curiosity. This study delves into the perplexing correlation, employing USDA and Statista data from 2000 to 2021 to scrutinize this seemingly incongruous connection.

The correlation coefficient of 0.9276714 and p < 0.01 indicates a compelling link, sparking thoughts of GMOs morphing into "Gentlemen Making Offspring." Could it be that GMO-infused cotton somehow bestows super-fathering powers? Or does it merely attract single fathers, drawn in by the allure of scientifically enhanced cotton crops?

While causation remains enigmatic, the correlation between GMO cotton and single fatherhood proves to be a head-turning anomaly, leaving researchers pondering the implications of "GMO: Good Magnet for One-parent households?" This study serves as a catalyst for reimagining the realms of cotton and fatherhood, unveiling a quirky correlation that tantalizes the mind and tickles the funny bone.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
The intersection of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton production and the prevalence of households led by single fathers is a perplexing conundrum that has called forth inquisitive minds and raised more than a few eyebrows. This unexpected and seemingly whimsical correlation has spawned a myriad of questions, and the pressing need to uncover the underlying mechanisms has incited a fervent quest for answers.
As researchers tiptoe through the fields of genetic modification and family dynamics, the allure of unraveling this enigma becomes irresistible. The statistical relationship, with a correlation coefficient of 0.9276714 and p < 0.01, beckons us like a tantalizing riddle waiting to be solved. One cannot help but wonder if GMOs hold the secret to the proliferation of single fathers, or if there exists a not-so-subtle relationship between enhanced cotton crops and enthusiastic fatherhood.
This peculiar correlation presents itself as a veritable Pandora's box of possibilities, teasing our scholarly minds with the potential for genetically modified cotton to serve as a beacon, attracting single fathers like moths to a scientifically enhanced flame. The notion of GMOs possibly transmogrifying into "Gentlemen Making Offspring" is nothing short of an amusing flight of fancy that prompts a lighthearted chuckle and a raised eyebrow in equal measure.
Intriguingly, the prospect of causation remains shrouded in mystery, and the quirky dance between GMO-infused cotton and single fatherhood gives rise to an abundance of speculative musings. Could it be that GMOs possess hidden aphrodisiacal properties that draw single fathers like bees to nectar? Or perhaps the allure of scientifically bolstered cotton traverses into the realm of family dynamics, redefining the adage of "sowing one's wild oats" into a waggish interpretation of crop selection and household composition.
This study embarks on a humorous yet earnest journey into the domain of GMOs, cotton, and the underexplored linkage to single fatherhood. As we navigate through the labyrinth of data and statistical analyses, the quirky correlation between GMO cotton and single fatherhood emerges as a beacon of scholarly amusement, offering a refreshing twist in the hallowed halls of agricultural and household research.
In the subsequent sections, we dissect the perplexing web of connections, unravel the layers of this unexpected relationship, and seek to shed light on the whimsical yet thought-provoking intersection of GMO growth and the growth of gracious guardianship. It is our hope that this study will ignite a newfound appreciation for the unexpected marvels that scientific inquiry can uncover and inspire a nod and a smile in the oftentimes solemn landscape of academic research.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

Data Collection:
The datasets utilized in this study were sourced from the USDA and Statista, forming the primary armamentarium for unraveling the enigmatic ties between genetically modified cotton and single father households. Information spanning the years 2000 to 2021 was meticulously gathered, akin to harvesting ripe statistical fruits from the bountiful orchards of the internet. Though the waters of data collection can be deep and murky, our intrepid team navigated through the digital waves with the precision of scholarly seafarers, casting our net far and wide in pursuit of the most robust and intriguing datasets.

Variable Selection:
The variables under scrutiny encompassed the prevalence of genetically modified cotton farming in California and the number of households headed by single fathers across the United States. These variables, akin to celestial bodies in a scientific firmament, held the promise of uncovering an unlikely gravitational pull between the seemingly disparate realms of agricultural GMOs and familial dynamics. The process of variable selection, much like crafting an elaborate scientific recipe, involved a judicious blend of thorough literature review and a sprinkle of scholarly intuition, resulting in a delectable concoction of research components.

Statistical Analysis:
The statistical analysis of the captured data involved the application of robust methods, including correlation analysis and regression modeling. The association between the use of genetically modified cotton and the prevalence of single father households was scrutinized with all the meticulousness of a detective unraveling a perplexing case. The correlation coefficient, akin to a scholarly sleuth, was summoned to the scene, yielding a value of 0.9276714 and a p-value of less than 0.01, providing compelling evidence of a gripping connection that would make even Sherlock Holmes nod in approval.

Mindful of Causation:
While the statistical findings whispered tantalizing secrets of correlation, the specter of causation loomed in the scientific ether. Mindful of the perils of inferring causality from correlation, our analyses proceeded with the caution befitting a scholarly obstetrician delivering a scientific infant into the world. A multitude of models and sensitivity analyses were employed to ensure a rigorous examination of the relationship, steering clear of hasty conclusions and opting instead for the measured pace of a statistical marathon.

In conclusion, the deployment of these methods furnished a canvas for unraveling the thought-provoking correlation between GMO cotton and single fatherhood, laying the groundwork for an intellectual symphony that harmonizes the intriguing melodies of science and societal dynamics.

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

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton in California and Number of households headed by single fathers in the United States. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from USDA and Statista .

For the time period 2000 to 2021, you found a correlation 0.9276714, r-squared of 0.8605742, 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]]
GMO Growth: Gleaning the Garish Gauntlet of Genetically Modified Cotton and the Growth of Gracious Guardianship: A Grandiose Governance Gamble

[[ABSTRACT]]
The association between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in California and the prevalence of households led by single fathers in the United States raises eyebrows and piques curiosity. This study delves into the perplexing correlation, employing USDA and Statista data from 2000 to 2021 to scrutinize this seemingly incongruous connection.

The correlation coefficient of 0.9276714 and p < 0.01 indicates a compelling link, sparking thoughts of GMOs morphing into "Gentlemen Making Offspring." Could it be that GMO-infused cotton somehow bestows super-fathering powers? Or does it merely attract single fathers, drawn in by the allure of scientifically enhanced cotton crops?

While causation remains enigmatic, the correlation between GMO cotton and single fatherhood proves to be a head-turning anomaly, leaving researchers pondering the implications of "GMO: Good Magnet for One-parent households?" This study serves as a catalyst for reimagining the realms of cotton and fatherhood, unveiling a quirky correlation that tantalizes the mind and tickles the funny bone.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
The intersection of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton production and the prevalence of households led by single fathers is a perplexing conundrum that has called forth inquisitive minds and raised more than a few eyebrows. This unexpected and seemingly whimsical correlation has spawned a myriad of questions, and the pressing need to uncover the underlying mechanisms has incited a fervent quest for answers.
As researchers tiptoe through the fields of genetic modification and family dynamics, the allure of unraveling this enigma becomes irresistible. The statistical relationship, with a correlation coefficient of 0.9276714 and p < 0.01, beckons us like a tantalizing riddle waiting to be solved. One cannot help but wonder if GMOs hold the secret to the proliferation of single fathers, or if there exists a not-so-subtle relationship between enhanced cotton crops and enthusiastic fatherhood.
This peculiar correlation presents itself as a veritable Pandora's box of possibilities, teasing our scholarly minds with the potential for genetically modified cotton to serve as a beacon, attracting single fathers like moths to a scientifically enhanced flame. The notion of GMOs possibly transmogrifying into "Gentlemen Making Offspring" is nothing short of an amusing flight of fancy that prompts a lighthearted chuckle and a raised eyebrow in equal measure.
Intriguingly, the prospect of causation remains shrouded in mystery, and the quirky dance between GMO-infused cotton and single fatherhood gives rise to an abundance of speculative musings. Could it be that GMOs possess hidden aphrodisiacal properties that draw single fathers like bees to nectar? Or perhaps the allure of scientifically bolstered cotton traverses into the realm of family dynamics, redefining the adage of "sowing one's wild oats" into a waggish interpretation of crop selection and household composition.
This study embarks on a humorous yet earnest journey into the domain of GMOs, cotton, and the underexplored linkage to single fatherhood. As we navigate through the labyrinth of data and statistical analyses, the quirky correlation between GMO cotton and single fatherhood emerges as a beacon of scholarly amusement, offering a refreshing twist in the hallowed halls of agricultural and household research.
In the subsequent sections, we dissect the perplexing web of connections, unravel the layers of this unexpected relationship, and seek to shed light on the whimsical yet thought-provoking intersection of GMO growth and the growth of gracious guardianship. It is our hope that this study will ignite a newfound appreciation for the unexpected marvels that scientific inquiry can uncover and inspire a nod and a smile in the oftentimes solemn landscape of academic research.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]

ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The results of our investigation into the correlation between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in California and the prevalence of households led by single fathers in the United States are, to put it mildly, quite intriguing. Our analysis of USDA and Statista data from the years 2000 to 2021 revealed a remarkably strong correlation with a coefficient of 0.9276714, an r-squared value of 0.8605742, and the ever-imposing p-value of less than 0.01.

As depicted in Figure 1, our scatterplot illustrates the striking relationship between these two variables. The data points fit snugly within the confines of the correlation coefficient, serving as a visual testament to the noteworthy connection between GMO-infused cotton and the proliferation of single father-headed households across the United States.

The robustness of this correlation has left us pondering a multitude of wry musings. Could it be that GMOs possess an uncanny allure that transforms cotton fields into beacons of paternal responsibility? Or do the scientifically enhanced cotton crops exude an irresistible charm, attracting single fathers like sailors drawn to the siren's song? These questions linger in the air like a good jest, provoking both hearty laughter and contemplative furrowing of brows.

While we refrain from drawing any definitive conclusions regarding causation, the magnetic pull between GMOs and single fatherhood cannot be ignored. This unexpected correlation has certainly injected a dose of whimsy into the world of agricultural and household research, prompting us to engage in playful ponderings about the potential influence of GMOs on family structures.

In summary, our findings paint a picture of a seemingly inexplicable correlation between GMO use in cotton in California and the prevalence of single father-headed households in the United States. This peculiar relationship captivates the imagination and sparks a chuckle, leaving us to marvel at the delightful oddities that statistical analyses can uncover in the realm of agricultural economics and family dynamics.

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

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton in California and Number of households headed by single fathers in the United States. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Limit your response to 500 tokens.

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

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

[[TITLE]]
GMO Growth: Gleaning the Garish Gauntlet of Genetically Modified Cotton and the Growth of Gracious Guardianship: A Grandiose Governance Gamble

[[ABSTRACT]]
The association between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in California and the prevalence of households led by single fathers in the United States raises eyebrows and piques curiosity. This study delves into the perplexing correlation, employing USDA and Statista data from 2000 to 2021 to scrutinize this seemingly incongruous connection.

The correlation coefficient of 0.9276714 and p < 0.01 indicates a compelling link, sparking thoughts of GMOs morphing into "Gentlemen Making Offspring." Could it be that GMO-infused cotton somehow bestows super-fathering powers? Or does it merely attract single fathers, drawn in by the allure of scientifically enhanced cotton crops?

While causation remains enigmatic, the correlation between GMO cotton and single fatherhood proves to be a head-turning anomaly, leaving researchers pondering the implications of "GMO: Good Magnet for One-parent households?" This study serves as a catalyst for reimagining the realms of cotton and fatherhood, unveiling a quirky correlation that tantalizes the mind and tickles the funny bone.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
In their exploration of the influence of genetically modified cotton cultivation in California on the prevalence of households led by single fathers in the United States, Smith et al. (2015) unearth a compelling relationship that defies conventional expectations. Similarly, Doe and Jones (2018) delve into the enigmatic correlation between GMO use in agricultural practices and non-traditional family structures, shedding light on the tantalizing intersection of seemingly disparate domains.
Expanding the scope of inquiry beyond academic literature, "GMOs and You: A Guide to Agricultural Advancements" by Agricultural Association presents an in-depth analysis of GMO utilization in cotton farming. Delving further into the broader societal implications, "The Changing Face of American Families" by Family Dynamics Institute offers thought-provoking insights into evolving family structures, providing a contextual backdrop for the present investigation.
Treading the line between fiction and reality, "The Cotton Conundrum" by Jane Fictionwriter and "Fatherhood Fantasies: A Tale of Single Parents" by John Novelest beckon readers into the intricate tapestry of cotton and fatherhood, offering imaginative narratives that echo the perplexing correlation under scrutiny. As the inquiry takes an unexpected turn, "The Enigmatic Efficacy of Eggplants" emerges as an offbeat yet strangely relevant contribution, drawing inspiration from seemingly unrelated agricultural phenomena to tease out unexpected parallels.
Lending an unexpected twist to the conventional sources of literature, a curious turn of events prompts our perusal of unconventional repositories. To our bemusement, the back of a shampoo bottle in a local supermarket aisle discloses an unforeseen revelation regarding the potential impact of genetically modified cotton on family dynamics, prompting an unlikely addition to the annals of scholarly inquiry.
The confluence of diverse sources, both scholarly and whimsical, underscores the multifaceted nature of the relationship between GMO cotton cultivation and single fatherhood. It is amidst this extraordinary juxtaposition that the present investigation seeks to navigate and illuminate the unearthed treasures of knowledge, presenting an amalgamation of quirky findings and scholarly revelations that promise to amuse, entertain, and inspire a newfound appreciation for the absurdities that scholarly inquiry can unearth.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our investigation into the correlation between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in California and the prevalence of households led by single fathers in the United States are, to put it mildly, quite intriguing. Our analysis of USDA and Statista data from the years 2000 to 2021 revealed a remarkably strong correlation with a coefficient of 0.9276714, an r-squared value of 0.8605742, and the ever-imposing p-value of less than 0.01.
As depicted in Figure 1, our scatterplot illustrates the striking relationship between these two variables. The data points fit snugly within the confines of the correlation coefficient, serving as a visual testament to the noteworthy connection between GMO-infused cotton and the proliferation of single father-headed households across the United States.
The robustness of this correlation has left us pondering a multitude of wry musings. Could it be that GMOs possess an uncanny allure that transforms cotton fields into beacons of paternal responsibility? Or do the scientifically enhanced cotton crops exude an irresistible charm, attracting single fathers like sailors drawn to the siren's song? These questions linger in the air like a good jest, provoking both hearty laughter and contemplative furrowing of brows.
While we refrain from drawing any definitive conclusions regarding causation, the magnetic pull between GMOs and single fatherhood cannot be ignored. This unexpected correlation has certainly injected a dose of whimsy into the world of agricultural and household research, prompting us to engage in playful ponderings about the potential influence of GMOs on family structures.
In summary, our findings paint a picture of a seemingly inexplicable correlation between GMO use in cotton in California and the prevalence of single father-headed households in the United States. This peculiar relationship captivates the imagination and sparks a chuckle, leaving us to marvel at the delightful oddities that statistical analyses can uncover in the realm of agricultural economics and family dynamics.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The robust correlation identified in our study between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in California and the prevalence of households led by single fathers in the United States aligns with prior research findings, confirming that this peculiar relationship is not just a figment of statistical whimsy. The magnetic pull of GMO-infused cotton on single fatherhood, reminiscent of a gentle tug-of-war between strands of DNA, defies conventional expectations and beckons researchers to engage in playful ponderings about the underlying mechanisms at play.

Our findings echo the sentiments expressed by Smith et al. (2015) and Doe and Jones (2018), who similarly discovered a compelling link between GMO use in agricultural practices and non-traditional family structures. The convergence of these independent investigations not only validates the quirkiness of the correlation but also underscores the significance of unraveling the enigmatic intertwining of genetically modified cotton and single fatherhood.

The unexpected nature of our results aligns with the whimsical elements unearthed in our literature review, particularly the peculiar insight gleaned from the back of a shampoo bottle in a local supermarket aisle. As our study sheds light on the significance of this correlation, we are reminded of the serendipitous nature of scholarly inquiry, where even the unlikeliest sources can bear the fruit of knowledge, much like a genetically modified crop yielding an unexpected harvest.

While our study refrains from delving into the realm of causation, the undeniable correlation between GMO-infused cotton and single father-headed households serves as a testament to the idiosyncratic pathways through which agricultural practices can seemingly influence family dynamics. The allure of genetically modified cotton fields, akin to a siren's call, sparks intrigue and serves as a captivating reminder of the unforeseen parallels that permeate the fabric of statistical analyses and agricultural economics.

In summation, our investigation has not only illuminated the unexpected correlation between GMO use in cotton in California and the prevalence of single father-headed households in the United States, but has also added a touch of whimsy to the scholarly discourse in agricultural and household research. Our findings beckon researchers to indulge in the delightful absurdities that statistical analyses can unveil, transforming the landscape of academic inquiry into a playground of peculiar correlations and lighthearted musings.

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

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton in California and Number of households headed by single fathers in the United States. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

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

Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
GMO Growth: Gleaning the Garish Gauntlet of Genetically Modified Cotton and the Growth of Gracious Guardianship: A Grandiose Governance Gamble

[[ABSTRACT]]
The association between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in California and the prevalence of households led by single fathers in the United States raises eyebrows and piques curiosity. This study delves into the perplexing correlation, employing USDA and Statista data from 2000 to 2021 to scrutinize this seemingly incongruous connection.

The correlation coefficient of 0.9276714 and p < 0.01 indicates a compelling link, sparking thoughts of GMOs morphing into "Gentlemen Making Offspring." Could it be that GMO-infused cotton somehow bestows super-fathering powers? Or does it merely attract single fathers, drawn in by the allure of scientifically enhanced cotton crops?

While causation remains enigmatic, the correlation between GMO cotton and single fatherhood proves to be a head-turning anomaly, leaving researchers pondering the implications of "GMO: Good Magnet for One-parent households?" This study serves as a catalyst for reimagining the realms of cotton and fatherhood, unveiling a quirky correlation that tantalizes the mind and tickles the funny bone.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
The intersection of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton production and the prevalence of households led by single fathers is a perplexing conundrum that has called forth inquisitive minds and raised more than a few eyebrows. This unexpected and seemingly whimsical correlation has spawned a myriad of questions, and the pressing need to uncover the underlying mechanisms has incited a fervent quest for answers.
As researchers tiptoe through the fields of genetic modification and family dynamics, the allure of unraveling this enigma becomes irresistible. The statistical relationship, with a correlation coefficient of 0.9276714 and p < 0.01, beckons us like a tantalizing riddle waiting to be solved. One cannot help but wonder if GMOs hold the secret to the proliferation of single fathers, or if there exists a not-so-subtle relationship between enhanced cotton crops and enthusiastic fatherhood.
This peculiar correlation presents itself as a veritable Pandora's box of possibilities, teasing our scholarly minds with the potential for genetically modified cotton to serve as a beacon, attracting single fathers like moths to a scientifically enhanced flame. The notion of GMOs possibly transmogrifying into "Gentlemen Making Offspring" is nothing short of an amusing flight of fancy that prompts a lighthearted chuckle and a raised eyebrow in equal measure.
Intriguingly, the prospect of causation remains shrouded in mystery, and the quirky dance between GMO-infused cotton and single fatherhood gives rise to an abundance of speculative musings. Could it be that GMOs possess hidden aphrodisiacal properties that draw single fathers like bees to nectar? Or perhaps the allure of scientifically bolstered cotton traverses into the realm of family dynamics, redefining the adage of "sowing one's wild oats" into a waggish interpretation of crop selection and household composition.
This study embarks on a humorous yet earnest journey into the domain of GMOs, cotton, and the underexplored linkage to single fatherhood. As we navigate through the labyrinth of data and statistical analyses, the quirky correlation between GMO cotton and single fatherhood emerges as a beacon of scholarly amusement, offering a refreshing twist in the hallowed halls of agricultural and household research.
In the subsequent sections, we dissect the perplexing web of connections, unravel the layers of this unexpected relationship, and seek to shed light on the whimsical yet thought-provoking intersection of GMO growth and the growth of gracious guardianship. It is our hope that this study will ignite a newfound appreciation for the unexpected marvels that scientific inquiry can uncover and inspire a nod and a smile in the oftentimes solemn landscape of academic research.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our investigation into the correlation between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in California and the prevalence of households led by single fathers in the United States are, to put it mildly, quite intriguing. Our analysis of USDA and Statista data from the years 2000 to 2021 revealed a remarkably strong correlation with a coefficient of 0.9276714, an r-squared value of 0.8605742, and the ever-imposing p-value of less than 0.01.
As depicted in Figure 1, our scatterplot illustrates the striking relationship between these two variables. The data points fit snugly within the confines of the correlation coefficient, serving as a visual testament to the noteworthy connection between GMO-infused cotton and the proliferation of single father-headed households across the United States.
The robustness of this correlation has left us pondering a multitude of wry musings. Could it be that GMOs possess an uncanny allure that transforms cotton fields into beacons of paternal responsibility? Or do the scientifically enhanced cotton crops exude an irresistible charm, attracting single fathers like sailors drawn to the siren's song? These questions linger in the air like a good jest, provoking both hearty laughter and contemplative furrowing of brows.
While we refrain from drawing any definitive conclusions regarding causation, the magnetic pull between GMOs and single fatherhood cannot be ignored. This unexpected correlation has certainly injected a dose of whimsy into the world of agricultural and household research, prompting us to engage in playful ponderings about the potential influence of GMOs on family structures.
In summary, our findings paint a picture of a seemingly inexplicable correlation between GMO use in cotton in California and the prevalence of single father-headed households in the United States. This peculiar relationship captivates the imagination and sparks a chuckle, leaving us to marvel at the delightful oddities that statistical analyses can uncover in the realm of agricultural economics and family dynamics.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In closing, the confounding correlation between the utilization of GMOs in cotton farming in California and the prevalence of households led by single fathers in the United States has proven to be a delightful labyrinth of statistical amusement. With a correlation coefficient akin to a strong gravitational pull and a p-value that practically leaps out and says, "Hey, this is statistically significant!", the linkage between these two variables stands as a testament to the whimsical caprices of academic inquiry.

Like a scholarly game of "connect the dots," our study has unearthed an enigmatic bond that tickles the fancy and raises more than a few eyebrows. Could it be that genetically modified cotton acts as a beacon of charm, bewitching single fathers with its scientific allure? Or perhaps GMOs possess the secret recipe for nurturing paternal instincts, akin to a modern-day elixir of responsible parenting. These perplexing possibilities veer into the realm of waggish hypothesis, offering a heady mix of scholarly pondering and tongue-in-cheek amusement.

Adding to the mirth, the notion of "GMO: Good Magnet for One-parent households?" has spun a web of intellectual whimsy, conjuring visions of cotton fields as veritable playgrounds for single fathers in search of scientifically enriched bonding experiences. The waggish dance of causation remains a wistful enigma, leaving us pondering the potential for GMO-infused cotton to sow the seeds of a new era in family dynamics.

As we bid adieu to this quirky foray into the world of GMOs and single fatherhood, it is with an arched brow and a bemused smile that we assert: no further research is needed in this domain. The lively tale of GMOs and gracious guardianship stands as a testament to the charming oddities that can spring forth from the rigors of statistical examination and infuses a touch of mirth into the world of agricultural and household research.

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 GMO Growth: Gleaning the Garish Gauntlet of Genetically Modified Cotton and the Growth of Gracious Guardianship: A Grandiose Governance Gamble. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Genetically Enhanced Agriculture

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 GMO Growth: Gleaning the Garish Gauntlet of Genetically Modified Cotton and the Growth of Gracious Guardianship: A Grandiose Governance Gamble. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The International Academy of Genetically Modified Organism Research (IAGMOR)

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 GMO Growth: Gleaning the Garish Gauntlet of Genetically Modified Cotton and the Growth of Gracious Guardianship: A Grandiose Governance Gamble with an abstract of The association between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming in California and the prevalence of households led by single fathers in the United States raises eyebrows and piques curiosity. This study delves into the perplexing correlation, employing USDA and Statista data from 2000 to 2021 to scrutinize this seemingly incongruous connection.
The correlation coefficient of 0.9276714 and p < 0.01 indicates a compelling link, sparking thoughts of GMOs morphing into "Gentlemen Making Offspring." Could it be that GMO-infused cotton somehow bestows super-fathering powers? Or does it merely attract single fathers, drawn in by the allure of scientifically enhanced cotton crops?
While causation remains enigmatic, the correlation between GMO cotton and single fatherhood proves to be a head-turning anomaly, leaving researchers pondering the implications of "GMO: Good Magnet for One-parent households?" This study serves as a catalyst for reimagining the realms of cotton and fatherhood, unveiling a quirky correlation that tantalizes the mind and tickles the funny bone.

ChatGPT:

genetically modified organisms, GMO, cotton farming, California, single fathers, United States, USDA data, Statista data, correlation coefficient, GMO cotton, fatherhood, one-parent households

*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

GMO use in cotton in California
Detailed data title: Percent of cotton planted in California genetically modified with both Bt and HT
Source: USDA
See what else correlates with GMO use in cotton in California

Number of households headed by single fathers in the United States
Source: Statista
See what else correlates with Number of households headed by single fathers in the United States

Correlation r = 0.9276714 (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 = 0.8605742 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 86.1% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Number of households headed by single fathers in the United States) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., GMO use in cotton in California) over the 22 years from 2000 through 2021.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 5.2E-10.^Show 0.0000000005234655482300414000
The p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme.^Note More specifically the p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme if we had only tested one pair of variables one time.

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

Who is going to stop me? p-value reporting doesn't require me to report how many calculations I had to go through in order to find a low p-value!
On average, you will find a correaltion as strong as 0.93 in 5.2E-8% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 1,910,345,396 random variables^Note You don't actually need 1 billion 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 21 degrees of freedom, ^Note Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 21 because we have two variables measured over a period of 22 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.

[ 0.83, 0.97 ] 95% correlation confidence interval (using the Fisher z-transformation)
^{Read more about the confidence interval} The confidence interval is an estimate the range of the value of the correlation coefficient, using the correlation itself as an input. The values are meant to be the low and high end of the correlation coefficient with 95% confidence.

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

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

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

	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016	2017	2018	2019	2020	2021
GMO use in cotton in California (GMO cotton %)	24	40	33	39	52	53	57	61	60	73	83	80	80	77	77	71	78	72	81	89	95	92
Number of households headed by single fathers in the United States (Single father households)	4277	4440	4663	4717	4901	5134	5067	5103	5255	5582	5649	5888	6231	6330	6162	6311	6452	6351	6485	6506	6964	7214

Why this works

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    return correlation, r_squared, p_value

# These are the arrays for the variables shown on this page, but you can modify them to be any two sets of numbers
array_1 = np.array([24,40,33,39,52,53,57,61,60,73,83,80,80,77,77,71,78,72,81,89,95,92,])
array_2 = np.array([4277,4440,4663,4717,4901,5134,5067,5103,5255,5582,5649,5888,6231,6330,6162,6311,6452,6351,6485,6506,6964,7214,])
array_1_name = "GMO use in cotton in California"
array_2_name = "Number of households headed by single fathers 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. ^Note Attribution can take many different forms. If you leave the "tylervigen.com" link in the image, that satisfies it just fine. If you remove it and move it to a footnote, that's fine too. You can also just write "Charts courtesy of Tyler Vigen" at the bottom of an article.

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

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

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

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

Download images for these variables:

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

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

Alternatively you can use a tool like Inkscape.
High resolution line chart, optimized for mobile
Alternative high resolution line chart
Scatterplot
Portable line chart (png)
Portable line chart (png), optimized for mobile
Line chart for only GMO use in cotton in California
Line chart for only Number of households headed by single fathers in the United States
AI-generated correlation image
The spurious research paper: GMO Growth: Gleaning the Garish Gauntlet of Genetically Modified Cotton and the Growth of Gracious Guardianship: A Grandiose Governance Gamble

View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Kudos for rating!

Correlation ID: 3422 · Black Variable ID: 804 · Red Variable ID: 355


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