about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #3,664 · 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 corn grown in Kansas and the second variable is Number of Lawyers in the United States.  The chart goes from 2000 to 2022, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image

AI explanation

As GMO corn in Kansas grew larger and more resilient, it created a surplus of corn. This led to an increase in corn-related legal disputes, prompting a higher demand for lawyers in the United States. They say this is the corniest reason for the lawyer population boom!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image of a small town in Kansas, with rows of genetically modified tall cornstalks stretching across the fields bathed in the golden glow of the setting sun. In the midst of the fields, there is a sleek, high-tech law office with a "Now Open" sign, standing prominently and efficiently. The image should depict a line of lawyers in sharp, futuristic suits pouring in and out of the office, showcasing the blend of the thriving GMO corn industry and the increasing number of high-tech lawyers in the United States. The visual representation should capture the convergence of agriculture and legal innovation in a simple and striking manner. 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 corn grown in Kansas and Number of Lawyers in the United States. Given these, which of the following image style descriptions seems most appropriate? Pick the one that seems to be related to one of the variables at hand. Please respond with only one of the following potential descriptions: a funny image you would see on reddit Psychedelic High-tech Surrealism Cyberpunk
ChatGPT: High-tech

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 corn grown in Kansas and Number of Lawyers in the United States, in the following situation: Because GMO corn increased lawyer population by creating legal disputes over patent infringement, leading to higher demand for legal services.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a small town in Kansas, rows of tall cornstalks stretch across the fields, bathed in the golden glow of the setting sun. Among the fields, a bustling law office with a "Now Open" sign stands, with a line of lawyers in sharp suits pouring in and out. The air is filled with the sweet scent of corn and the sound of legal discussions, blending the thriving GMO corn industry with the increasing number of lawyers in the United States.

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: [ High-tech ] and depicting this scene: In a small town in Kansas, rows of tall cornstalks stretch across the fields, bathed in the golden glow of the setting sun. Among the fields, a bustling law office with a "Now Open" sign stands, with a line of lawyers in sharp suits pouring in and out. The air is filled with the sweet scent of corn and the sound of legal discussions, blending the thriving GMO corn industry with the increasing number of lawyers in the United States. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image of a small town in Kansas, with rows of genetically modified tall cornstalks stretching across the fields bathed in the golden glow of the setting sun. In the midst of the fields, there is a sleek, high-tech law office with a "Now Open" sign, standing prominently and efficiently. The image should depict a line of lawyers in sharp, futuristic suits pouring in and out of the office, showcasing the blend of the thriving GMO corn industry and the increasing number of high-tech lawyers in the United States. The visual representation should capture the convergence of agriculture and legal innovation in a simple and striking manner.

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

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

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

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
The Kernel of Legal Ambiguity: Exploring the Correlation Between GMO Corn in Kansas and the Number of Lawyers in the United States

Journal of Transgenic Legal Studies

Jan 2024
Quick note: This sequence is long and repetitive. That's how the prompt engineering works for this one. I manage the output in Python to format it into this PDF.




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

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

Make the title seem clever.

Your research team used data from USDA and ABA to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9880997 and p < 0.01 for 2000 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]]
"The Kernel of Legal Ambiguity: Exploring the Correlation Between GMO Corn in Kansas and the Number of Lawyers in the United States"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the ostensibly disparate realms of agricultural biotechnology and legal professions to investigate a potentially unexpected correlation: the relationship between the use of genetically modified organism (GMO) corn in the heartland of Kansas and the number of lawyers in the United States. By leveraging comprehensive data from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the American Bar Association (ABA), our research team endeavored to unravel this enigmatic connection.

Employing rigorous statistical analyses, we discovered a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9880997 and a p-value below 0.01 for the years spanning from 2000 to 2022. Our findings suggest a compelling, albeit unorthodox, relationship between the widespread adoption of GMO corn in Kansas and the proliferation of legal practitioners across the nation. This unexpected association prompts further inquiry and opens avenues for speculative discussions that transcend conventional disciplinary boundaries.


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

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

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"The Kernel of Legal Ambiguity: Exploring the Correlation Between GMO Corn in Kansas and the Number of Lawyers in the United States"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the ostensibly disparate realms of agricultural biotechnology and legal professions to investigate a potentially unexpected correlation: the relationship between the use of genetically modified organism (GMO) corn in the heartland of Kansas and the number of lawyers in the United States. By leveraging comprehensive data from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the American Bar Association (ABA), our research team endeavored to unravel this enigmatic connection.

Employing rigorous statistical analyses, we discovered a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9880997 and a p-value below 0.01 for the years spanning from 2000 to 2022. Our findings suggest a compelling, albeit unorthodox, relationship between the widespread adoption of GMO corn in Kansas and the proliferation of legal practitioners across the nation. This unexpected association prompts further inquiry and opens avenues for speculative discussions that transcend conventional disciplinary boundaries.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

The interplay between agriculture and law is not often the subject of scholarly inquiry, yet it holds the potential for intriguing connections and revelations. In the current era of technological advancement, the prevalence of genetically modified organism (GMO) crops has become a ubiquitous feature of the agricultural landscape, particularly in the heartland of the United States. Similarly, the legal profession has evolved, proliferating in tandem with societal changes and shifting norms. It is within this context that our study seeks to shed light on a surprising correlation between the adoption of GMO corn in Kansas and the number of lawyers in the United States.

The notion of associating corn cultivation with the legal domain may prompt quizzical looks and raised eyebrows. However, our research aims to uncover patterns that may elude casual observation, not unlike discovering a hidden kernel in an ear of corn. Previous studies have largely focused on the agronomic, environmental, and economic implications of GMO corn, but few have ventured into the legal realm. Nevertheless, as we delve into our analysis, we hope to kernel down into the crux of this unexpected relationship and pose a cobundrum for the scholarly community to ponder.

This paper presents the results of an empirical investigation into this uncharted territory, with the aim of stimulating discussion and igniting curiosity about the hidden connections in our complex sociocultural tapestry. Through the careful examination of data culled from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the American Bar Association (ABA), our study provides empirical evidence that challenges conventional disciplinary boundaries and invites a-maize-ing contemplation. The findings not only yield insight into the symbiotic relationship between agricultural practices and legal trends but also cultivate a fertile ground for interdisciplinary discourse. In corntrast to conventional wisdom, our research uncovers kernels of truth that challenge the boundaries of disciplinary silos and offer a cornucopia of new perspectives.


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 corn grown in Kansas and Number of Lawyers in the United States. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

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

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then 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]]
"The Kernel of Legal Ambiguity: Exploring the Correlation Between GMO Corn in Kansas and the Number of Lawyers in the United States"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the ostensibly disparate realms of agricultural biotechnology and legal professions to investigate a potentially unexpected correlation: the relationship between the use of genetically modified organism (GMO) corn in the heartland of Kansas and the number of lawyers in the United States. By leveraging comprehensive data from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the American Bar Association (ABA), our research team endeavored to unravel this enigmatic connection.

Employing rigorous statistical analyses, we discovered a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9880997 and a p-value below 0.01 for the years spanning from 2000 to 2022. Our findings suggest a compelling, albeit unorthodox, relationship between the widespread adoption of GMO corn in Kansas and the proliferation of legal practitioners across the nation. This unexpected association prompts further inquiry and opens avenues for speculative discussions that transcend conventional disciplinary boundaries.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The interplay between agriculture and law is not often the subject of scholarly inquiry, yet it holds the potential for intriguing connections and revelations. In the current era of technological advancement, the prevalence of genetically modified organism (GMO) crops has become a ubiquitous feature of the agricultural landscape, particularly in the heartland of the United States. Similarly, the legal profession has evolved, proliferating in tandem with societal changes and shifting norms. It is within this context that our study seeks to shed light on a surprising correlation between the adoption of GMO corn in Kansas and the number of lawyers in the United States.
The notion of associating corn cultivation with the legal domain may prompt quizzical looks and raised eyebrows. However, our research aims to uncover patterns that may elude casual observation, not unlike discovering a hidden kernel in an ear of corn. Previous studies have largely focused on the agronomic, environmental, and economic implications of GMO corn, but few have ventured into the legal realm. Nevertheless, as we delve into our analysis, we hope to kernel down into the crux of this unexpected relationship and pose a cobundrum for the scholarly community to ponder.
This paper presents the results of an empirical investigation into this uncharted territory, with the aim of stimulating discussion and igniting curiosity about the hidden connections in our complex sociocultural tapestry. Through the careful examination of data culled from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the American Bar Association (ABA), our study provides empirical evidence that challenges conventional disciplinary boundaries and invites a-maize-ing contemplation. The findings not only yield insight into the symbiotic relationship between agricultural practices and legal trends but also cultivate a fertile ground for interdisciplinary discourse. In corntrast to conventional wisdom, our research uncovers kernels of truth that challenge the boundaries of disciplinary silos and offer a cornucopia of new perspectives.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

Several studies have delved into the complex topic of genetically modified organism (GMO) crops and their multifaceted impacts on various facets of society. Smith et al. (2010) examined the agronomic and economic implications of GMO corn cultivation in the United States, shedding light on its prolific adoption and the challenges it poses for traditional agricultural practices. Similarly, Doe and Jones (2015) explored the environmental ramifications of GMO corn, presenting a comprehensive analysis of its effects on soil health and biodiversity. The interdisciplinary nature of GMO research underscores its broad implications and invites interdisciplinary inquiry.

Turning to the legal domain, the correlation between agricultural practices and legal trends is a relatively unexplored area of inquiry. Nonetheless, as legal frameworks evolve in response to societal changes, there may be unexpected connections waiting to be uncovered. In "Understanding Legal Structures in Agriculture" by Green (2018), the author examines the intricate web of regulations and statutes that govern agricultural practices, hinting at the potential intersection of agricultural biotechnology and legal dynamics. In a similar vein, "Harvesting Justice: Transforming Law, Food, and Agriculture" by Patel and Moore (2009) offers insights into the social justice implications of agricultural law, laying the groundwork for a broader examination of the legal dimensions of agricultural practices.

Moving into the realm of fiction, literary works such as "The Corn Identity" by Larby (2002) and "The Lawyer's Labyrinth" by Stern (2017) playfully hint at the intersection of agriculture and legal complexities, offering imaginative narratives that blend seemingly disparate elements. While these fictional works may not provide empirical evidence, they serve as subtle reminders that unexpected connections can often be found in the most unlikely of places.

In a departure from traditional academic sources, the authors also conducted an unconventional review of materials including, but not limited to, the backs of shampoo bottles, fortune cookie messages, and overheard conversations at the local farmers' market. While these sources may not adhere to conventional scholarly standards, they offer a whimsical glimpse into the potential for unexpected revelations in everyday contexts.

The culmination of this literature review suggests that the correlation between GMO corn in Kansas and the number of lawyers in the United States traverses disciplinary and imaginative boundaries, hinting at a potpourri of unexplored connections that await further investigation.


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 corn grown in Kansas and Number of Lawyers in the United States. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from USDA and ABA . You used data from 2000 to 2022

Make up the research methods you don't know. Make them a bit goofy and convoluted.

Here is the title, abstract, and introduction of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"The Kernel of Legal Ambiguity: Exploring the Correlation Between GMO Corn in Kansas and the Number of Lawyers in the United States"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the ostensibly disparate realms of agricultural biotechnology and legal professions to investigate a potentially unexpected correlation: the relationship between the use of genetically modified organism (GMO) corn in the heartland of Kansas and the number of lawyers in the United States. By leveraging comprehensive data from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the American Bar Association (ABA), our research team endeavored to unravel this enigmatic connection.

Employing rigorous statistical analyses, we discovered a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9880997 and a p-value below 0.01 for the years spanning from 2000 to 2022. Our findings suggest a compelling, albeit unorthodox, relationship between the widespread adoption of GMO corn in Kansas and the proliferation of legal practitioners across the nation. This unexpected association prompts further inquiry and opens avenues for speculative discussions that transcend conventional disciplinary boundaries.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
The interplay between agriculture and law is not often the subject of scholarly inquiry, yet it holds the potential for intriguing connections and revelations. In the current era of technological advancement, the prevalence of genetically modified organism (GMO) crops has become a ubiquitous feature of the agricultural landscape, particularly in the heartland of the United States. Similarly, the legal profession has evolved, proliferating in tandem with societal changes and shifting norms. It is within this context that our study seeks to shed light on a surprising correlation between the adoption of GMO corn in Kansas and the number of lawyers in the United States.
The notion of associating corn cultivation with the legal domain may prompt quizzical looks and raised eyebrows. However, our research aims to uncover patterns that may elude casual observation, not unlike discovering a hidden kernel in an ear of corn. Previous studies have largely focused on the agronomic, environmental, and economic implications of GMO corn, but few have ventured into the legal realm. Nevertheless, as we delve into our analysis, we hope to kernel down into the crux of this unexpected relationship and pose a cobundrum for the scholarly community to ponder.
This paper presents the results of an empirical investigation into this uncharted territory, with the aim of stimulating discussion and igniting curiosity about the hidden connections in our complex sociocultural tapestry. Through the careful examination of data culled from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the American Bar Association (ABA), our study provides empirical evidence that challenges conventional disciplinary boundaries and invites a-maize-ing contemplation. The findings not only yield insight into the symbiotic relationship between agricultural practices and legal trends but also cultivate a fertile ground for interdisciplinary discourse. In corntrast to conventional wisdom, our research uncovers kernels of truth that challenge the boundaries of disciplinary silos and offer a cornucopia of new perspectives.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To explore the purportedly ear-reverent relationship between the use of genetically modified organism (GMO) corn in Kansas and the number of lawyers in the United States, a comprehensive and convoluted methodology was devised. The data collection process involved a thorough cyberrace through the vast expanses of the internet, albeit with a primary reliance on reputable sources such as the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the American Bar Association (ABA). Information spanning the years from 2000 to 2022 was harvested and carefully husked for analysis, ensuring a robust sample size to elevate the credibility of our findings.

The first step in our convoluted process involved quantifying the extent of GMO corn cultivation in Kansas, utilizing information from USDA reports and agricultural databases. We then undertook a maize-ing endeavor to comprehensively capture the geographical distribution and frequency of GMO corn adoption, aiming to create a kernel of truth regarding its prevalence.

Simultaneously, the number of lawyers in the United States was corn-stantly monitored and documenting, with data sourced from the ABA's extensive records. This process involved counting the legal practitioners across various states and territories, emphasizing a thorough cob-verage to yield a comprehensive representation of the legal workforce.

Following this, statistical analyses were conducted to establish a corncise and robust understanding of the relationship between GMO corn usage in Kansas and the proliferation of legal professionals. Multivariate regression models were employed to husk out the interplay between the two variables, accounting for potential confounding factors such as population density, economic conditions, and legal policies. Careful cob-ordination and validation of the data were achieved to ensure the reliability and validity of our results.

The obtained data were then kernel-ated into compelling visual representations, including corn-siderate scatter plots and corn-elation matrices, to illuminate the interconnected patterns between GMO corn adoption and the legal workforce. This approach illuminated the proverbial cob-web of correlations and patterns, guiding our hypotheses towards a-maize-ing revelations.

In essence, the methodology employed in this research endeavor sought to meticulously cob-ble together a comprehensive and rigorous analysis, embracing the complexity of interdisciplinary inquiries with the same fervor as a diligent botanist tending to an ear of corn. The meticulous corn-parison and analysis of the data enabled our team to peel back the layers of complexity and reveal a potential nexus between GMO corn cultivation in Kansas and the abundance of legal practitioners in the United States.


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 corn grown in Kansas and Number of Lawyers in the United States. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

For the time period 2000 to 2022, you found a correlation 0.9880997, r-squared of 0.9763410, and p < 0.01.

One figure will be included. The figure (Fig. 1) is a scatterplot showing the strong correlation between the two variables. You don't need to specify where; I will add the figure.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"The Kernel of Legal Ambiguity: Exploring the Correlation Between GMO Corn in Kansas and the Number of Lawyers in the United States"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the ostensibly disparate realms of agricultural biotechnology and legal professions to investigate a potentially unexpected correlation: the relationship between the use of genetically modified organism (GMO) corn in the heartland of Kansas and the number of lawyers in the United States. By leveraging comprehensive data from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the American Bar Association (ABA), our research team endeavored to unravel this enigmatic connection.

Employing rigorous statistical analyses, we discovered a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9880997 and a p-value below 0.01 for the years spanning from 2000 to 2022. Our findings suggest a compelling, albeit unorthodox, relationship between the widespread adoption of GMO corn in Kansas and the proliferation of legal practitioners across the nation. This unexpected association prompts further inquiry and opens avenues for speculative discussions that transcend conventional disciplinary boundaries.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
The interplay between agriculture and law is not often the subject of scholarly inquiry, yet it holds the potential for intriguing connections and revelations. In the current era of technological advancement, the prevalence of genetically modified organism (GMO) crops has become a ubiquitous feature of the agricultural landscape, particularly in the heartland of the United States. Similarly, the legal profession has evolved, proliferating in tandem with societal changes and shifting norms. It is within this context that our study seeks to shed light on a surprising correlation between the adoption of GMO corn in Kansas and the number of lawyers in the United States.
The notion of associating corn cultivation with the legal domain may prompt quizzical looks and raised eyebrows. However, our research aims to uncover patterns that may elude casual observation, not unlike discovering a hidden kernel in an ear of corn. Previous studies have largely focused on the agronomic, environmental, and economic implications of GMO corn, but few have ventured into the legal realm. Nevertheless, as we delve into our analysis, we hope to kernel down into the crux of this unexpected relationship and pose a cobundrum for the scholarly community to ponder.
This paper presents the results of an empirical investigation into this uncharted territory, with the aim of stimulating discussion and igniting curiosity about the hidden connections in our complex sociocultural tapestry. Through the careful examination of data culled from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the American Bar Association (ABA), our study provides empirical evidence that challenges conventional disciplinary boundaries and invites a-maize-ing contemplation. The findings not only yield insight into the symbiotic relationship between agricultural practices and legal trends but also cultivate a fertile ground for interdisciplinary discourse. In corntrast to conventional wisdom, our research uncovers kernels of truth that challenge the boundaries of disciplinary silos and offer a cornucopia of new perspectives.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The statistical analyses revealed a strikingly high correlation coefficient of 0.9880997 between the use of genetically modified organism (GMO) corn in Kansas and the number of lawyers in the United States over the period from 2000 to 2022. The r-squared value of 0.9763410 indicates that approximately 97.6% of the variability in the number of lawyers can be explained by the adoption of GMO corn in Kansas. Furthermore, the statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01 underscores the robustness of this unexpected relationship.

Figure 1 depicts a scatterplot illustrating the robust positive correlation between the quantity of GMO corn used in Kansas and the number of lawyers in the United States. The data points form a clear, upward-sloping pattern, akin to the growth of cornstalks in a well-fertilized field. The undeniable coherence between these variables is a-corn-panied by a distinct lack of outliers, indicating a remarkably consistent association throughout the years under investigation.

These findings shed light on an unconventional interconnection that transcends the boundaries of traditional academic inquiry. The link between the adoption of GMO corn in the heartland and the proliferation of legal professionals across the nation embodies a cornucopia of implications that extend beyond the confines of agronomy and jurisprudence. This unorthodox correlation serves as a thought-provoking kernel of insight into the complex web of societal and economic dynamics, inviting a-maize-ing contemplation and further exploration into the hidden relationships within our sociocultural landscape.


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 corn grown in Kansas and Number of Lawyers in the United States. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Limit your response to 500 tokens.

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

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

[[TITLE]]
"The Kernel of Legal Ambiguity: Exploring the Correlation Between GMO Corn in Kansas and the Number of Lawyers in the United States"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the ostensibly disparate realms of agricultural biotechnology and legal professions to investigate a potentially unexpected correlation: the relationship between the use of genetically modified organism (GMO) corn in the heartland of Kansas and the number of lawyers in the United States. By leveraging comprehensive data from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the American Bar Association (ABA), our research team endeavored to unravel this enigmatic connection.

Employing rigorous statistical analyses, we discovered a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9880997 and a p-value below 0.01 for the years spanning from 2000 to 2022. Our findings suggest a compelling, albeit unorthodox, relationship between the widespread adoption of GMO corn in Kansas and the proliferation of legal practitioners across the nation. This unexpected association prompts further inquiry and opens avenues for speculative discussions that transcend conventional disciplinary boundaries.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
Several studies have delved into the complex topic of genetically modified organism (GMO) crops and their multifaceted impacts on various facets of society. Smith et al. (2010) examined the agronomic and economic implications of GMO corn cultivation in the United States, shedding light on its prolific adoption and the challenges it poses for traditional agricultural practices. Similarly, Doe and Jones (2015) explored the environmental ramifications of GMO corn, presenting a comprehensive analysis of its effects on soil health and biodiversity. The interdisciplinary nature of GMO research underscores its broad implications and invites interdisciplinary inquiry.
Turning to the legal domain, the correlation between agricultural practices and legal trends is a relatively unexplored area of inquiry. Nonetheless, as legal frameworks evolve in response to societal changes, there may be unexpected connections waiting to be uncovered. In "Understanding Legal Structures in Agriculture" by Green (2018), the author examines the intricate web of regulations and statutes that govern agricultural practices, hinting at the potential intersection of agricultural biotechnology and legal dynamics. In a similar vein, "Harvesting Justice: Transforming Law, Food, and Agriculture" by Patel and Moore (2009) offers insights into the social justice implications of agricultural law, laying the groundwork for a broader examination of the legal dimensions of agricultural practices.
Moving into the realm of fiction, literary works such as "The Corn Identity" by Larby (2002) and "The Lawyer's Labyrinth" by Stern (2017) playfully hint at the intersection of agriculture and legal complexities, offering imaginative narratives that blend seemingly disparate elements. While these fictional works may not provide empirical evidence, they serve as subtle reminders that unexpected connections can often be found in the most unlikely of places.
In a departure from traditional academic sources, the authors also conducted an unconventional review of materials including, but not limited to, the backs of shampoo bottles, fortune cookie messages, and overheard conversations at the local farmers' market. While these sources may not adhere to conventional scholarly standards, they offer a whimsical glimpse into the potential for unexpected revelations in everyday contexts.
The culmination of this literature review suggests that the correlation between GMO corn in Kansas and the number of lawyers in the United States traverses disciplinary and imaginative boundaries, hinting at a potpourri of unexplored connections that await further investigation.

[[RESULTS]]
The statistical analyses revealed a strikingly high correlation coefficient of 0.9880997 between the use of genetically modified organism (GMO) corn in Kansas and the number of lawyers in the United States over the period from 2000 to 2022. The r-squared value of 0.9763410 indicates that approximately 97.6% of the variability in the number of lawyers can be explained by the adoption of GMO corn in Kansas. Furthermore, the statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01 underscores the robustness of this unexpected relationship.
Figure 1 depicts a scatterplot illustrating the robust positive correlation between the quantity of GMO corn used in Kansas and the number of lawyers in the United States. The data points form a clear, upward-sloping pattern, akin to the growth of cornstalks in a well-fertilized field. The undeniable coherence between these variables is a-corn-panied by a distinct lack of outliers, indicating a remarkably consistent association throughout the years under investigation.
These findings shed light on an unconventional interconnection that transcends the boundaries of traditional academic inquiry. The link between the adoption of GMO corn in the heartland and the proliferation of legal professionals across the nation embodies a cornucopia of implications that extend beyond the confines of agronomy and jurisprudence. This unorthodox correlation serves as a thought-provoking kernel of insight into the complex web of societal and economic dynamics, inviting a-maize-ing contemplation and further exploration into the hidden relationships within our sociocultural landscape.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The present study has unveiled an unexpectedly robust correlation between the usage of genetically modified organism (GMO) corn in Kansas and the number of lawyers in the United States, with a correlation coefficient of 0.9880997 and a p-value of less than 0.01. These findings are in line with prior literature that predicates the existence of potential linkages between seemingly disparate domains. The studies of Smith et al. (2010) and Doe and Jones (2015) contemplated the multifaceted impacts of GMO crops, laying the groundwork for our investigation into the unanticipated intersection of GMO corn and the legal profession. Similarly, Green (2018) and Patel and Moore (2009) offered incipient insights into the nuanced legal dimensions of agricultural practices, setting the stage for our groundbreaking discovery of the correlation between GMO corn in Kansas and the number of lawyers in the United States.

Notably, our results lend empirical support to the playful literary works of Larby (2002) and Stern (2017), which, despite their fictional nature, candidly hinted at the intertwining complexities of corn and legal verbiage. The whimsical and unconventional sources consulted by the authors during the literature review have also yielded unexpected dividends, underlining the potential for profound revelations in the most unanticipated settings, such as the backs of shampoo bottles and overheard conversations at the farmers' market. This supports the assertion that the cornucopia of unexplored connections between GMO corn and legal professionals constitutes a fertile ground for further exploration.

The findings of this study open a-maize-ing new avenues for interdisciplinary collaboration and imaginative inquiry. The remarkable coherence between the adoption of GMO corn in the heartland of Kansas and the proliferation of the legal workforce across the nation represents an uncharted territory for future investigations. This unorthodox relationship stands as a testament to the intricate web of societal and economic dynamics woven into the fabric of our sociocultural landscape, calling for continued contemplation and exploration. The kernel of insight uncovered in this study has the potential to sow the seeds of interdisciplinary collaboration and heuristic endeavors, ushering in a new era of scholarly curiosity and pun-derful discoveries.


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 corn grown in Kansas and Number of Lawyers in the United States. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
"The Kernel of Legal Ambiguity: Exploring the Correlation Between GMO Corn in Kansas and the Number of Lawyers in the United States"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the ostensibly disparate realms of agricultural biotechnology and legal professions to investigate a potentially unexpected correlation: the relationship between the use of genetically modified organism (GMO) corn in the heartland of Kansas and the number of lawyers in the United States. By leveraging comprehensive data from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the American Bar Association (ABA), our research team endeavored to unravel this enigmatic connection.

Employing rigorous statistical analyses, we discovered a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9880997 and a p-value below 0.01 for the years spanning from 2000 to 2022. Our findings suggest a compelling, albeit unorthodox, relationship between the widespread adoption of GMO corn in Kansas and the proliferation of legal practitioners across the nation. This unexpected association prompts further inquiry and opens avenues for speculative discussions that transcend conventional disciplinary boundaries.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
The interplay between agriculture and law is not often the subject of scholarly inquiry, yet it holds the potential for intriguing connections and revelations. In the current era of technological advancement, the prevalence of genetically modified organism (GMO) crops has become a ubiquitous feature of the agricultural landscape, particularly in the heartland of the United States. Similarly, the legal profession has evolved, proliferating in tandem with societal changes and shifting norms. It is within this context that our study seeks to shed light on a surprising correlation between the adoption of GMO corn in Kansas and the number of lawyers in the United States.
The notion of associating corn cultivation with the legal domain may prompt quizzical looks and raised eyebrows. However, our research aims to uncover patterns that may elude casual observation, not unlike discovering a hidden kernel in an ear of corn. Previous studies have largely focused on the agronomic, environmental, and economic implications of GMO corn, but few have ventured into the legal realm. Nevertheless, as we delve into our analysis, we hope to kernel down into the crux of this unexpected relationship and pose a cobundrum for the scholarly community to ponder.
This paper presents the results of an empirical investigation into this uncharted territory, with the aim of stimulating discussion and igniting curiosity about the hidden connections in our complex sociocultural tapestry. Through the careful examination of data culled from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the American Bar Association (ABA), our study provides empirical evidence that challenges conventional disciplinary boundaries and invites a-maize-ing contemplation. The findings not only yield insight into the symbiotic relationship between agricultural practices and legal trends but also cultivate a fertile ground for interdisciplinary discourse. In corntrast to conventional wisdom, our research uncovers kernels of truth that challenge the boundaries of disciplinary silos and offer a cornucopia of new perspectives.

[[RESULTS]]
The statistical analyses revealed a strikingly high correlation coefficient of 0.9880997 between the use of genetically modified organism (GMO) corn in Kansas and the number of lawyers in the United States over the period from 2000 to 2022. The r-squared value of 0.9763410 indicates that approximately 97.6% of the variability in the number of lawyers can be explained by the adoption of GMO corn in Kansas. Furthermore, the statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01 underscores the robustness of this unexpected relationship.
Figure 1 depicts a scatterplot illustrating the robust positive correlation between the quantity of GMO corn used in Kansas and the number of lawyers in the United States. The data points form a clear, upward-sloping pattern, akin to the growth of cornstalks in a well-fertilized field. The undeniable coherence between these variables is a-corn-panied by a distinct lack of outliers, indicating a remarkably consistent association throughout the years under investigation.
These findings shed light on an unconventional interconnection that transcends the boundaries of traditional academic inquiry. The link between the adoption of GMO corn in the heartland and the proliferation of legal professionals across the nation embodies a cornucopia of implications that extend beyond the confines of agronomy and jurisprudence. This unorthodox correlation serves as a thought-provoking kernel of insight into the complex web of societal and economic dynamics, inviting a-maize-ing contemplation and further exploration into the hidden relationships within our sociocultural landscape.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our investigation has unearthed a highly significant and robust correlation between the adoption of genetically modified organism (GMO) corn in Kansas and the proliferation of lawyers across the United States. This unorthodox finding provides fertile ground for a-maize-ing speculation and opens up a cornucopia of possibilities for interdisciplinary discussions that transcend the boundaries of conventional scholarship.

The unexpected connection between the cultivation of GMO corn and the abundance of legal practitioners challenges the conventional wisdom surrounding the disparate domains of agriculture and law. The implications of this correlation are as plentiful as an ear of corn on a well-tended stalk, prompting a kernel of curiosity about the hidden dynamics shaping our societal landscape.

We must cob-sider the potential mechanisms underlying this correlation. Perhaps the growth of GMO corn fields serves as a-tractor for legal disputes, or maybe it stems from the law's affinity for cob-fusing language. The exact nature of this relationship remains tantalizingly enigmatic, much like an elusive ear of corn in a field.

Nevertheless, the statistically significant findings warrant a-maize-ing consideration and stimulate further corn-templation of the intricate connections within our sociocultural fabric. This investigation serves as a reminder that interdisciplinary perspectives can yield surprising insights, much like stumbling upon a hidden kernel amidst the vast cornfields of conventional wisdom.

It is our hope that this research will plant the seeds of curiosity and inspire future inquiries into the unexplored terrain of unexpected correlations. However, for now, it is safe to say that no further research is needed in this area.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of academic journals. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding research, scientific, or academic journal that would publish a paper entited The Kernel of Legal Ambiguity: Exploring the Correlation Between GMO Corn in Kansas and the Number of Lawyers in the United States. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

Journal of Transgenic Legal Studies


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of nonprofit research organizations and associations. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding nonprofit, academic, or scientific association or organization that would sponsor research that resulted in a paper entited The Kernel of Legal Ambiguity: Exploring the Correlation Between GMO Corn in Kansas and the Number of Lawyers in the United States. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for Agricultural Jurisprudence and Biotech Analysis


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide potential search keywords separated by commas. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide potential search keywords for a paper titled The Kernel of Legal Ambiguity: Exploring the Correlation Between GMO Corn in Kansas and the Number of Lawyers in the United States with an abstract of This study delves into the ostensibly disparate realms of agricultural biotechnology and legal professions to investigate a potentially unexpected correlation: the relationship between the use of genetically modified organism (GMO) corn in the heartland of Kansas and the number of lawyers in the United States. By leveraging comprehensive data from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the American Bar Association (ABA), our research team endeavored to unravel this enigmatic connection.
Employing rigorous statistical analyses, we discovered a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9880997 and a p-value below 0.01 for the years spanning from 2000 to 2022. Our findings suggest a compelling, albeit unorthodox, relationship between the widespread adoption of GMO corn in Kansas and the proliferation of legal practitioners across the nation. This unexpected association prompts further inquiry and opens avenues for speculative discussions that transcend conventional disciplinary boundaries.

ChatGPT:

GMO corn, Kansas, lawyers, United States, correlation, agriculture, biotechnology, legal profession, USDA, American Bar Association, statistical analysis, correlation coefficient, p-value, adoption, proliferation

*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 corn grown in Kansas
Detailed data title: Percent of all corn planted in Kansas genetically modified with both Bt and HT
Source: USDA
See what else correlates with GMO use in corn grown in Kansas

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

Correlation r = 0.9880997 (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 = 0.9763410 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 97.6% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Number of Lawyers in the United States) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., GMO use in corn grown in Kansas) over the 23 years from 2000 through 2022.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 1.5E-18. 0.0000000000000000014701706271
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 0.99 in 1.5E-16% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 680,193,156,880,409,216 random variables You don't actually need 680 quadrillion variables to find a correlation like this one. I don't have that many variables in my database. You can also correlate variables that are not independent. I do this a lot.

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

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

Just to be clear: I'm being completely transparent about the calculations. There is no math trickery. This is just how statistics shakes out when you calculate hundreds of millions of random correlations.
with the same 22 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 22 because we have two variables measured over a period of 23 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.

[ 0.97, 1 ] 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.
20002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022
GMO use in corn grown in Kansas (GMO corn %)11255101221353840425169727979778482818478
Number of Lawyers in the United States (Lawyers)10224601048900104975010586601084500110477011169701143360116212011803901203100122545012452001268010128143013007001312870133596013423801352080132874013279101327010




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([1,1,2,5,5,10,12,21,35,38,40,42,51,69,72,79,79,77,84,82,81,84,78,])
array_2 = np.array([1022460,1048900,1049750,1058660,1084500,1104770,1116970,1143360,1162120,1180390,1203100,1225450,1245200,1268010,1281430,1300700,1312870,1335960,1342380,1352080,1328740,1327910,1327010,])
array_1_name = "GMO use in corn grown in Kansas"
array_2_name = "Number of Lawyers in the United States"

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

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



Reuseable content

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

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

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

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

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

Download images for these variables:


View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Thanks for shining a light on this correlation!


Correlation ID: 3664 · Black Variable ID: 742 · Red Variable ID: 542
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0