about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #3,778 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Volume of wheat used in the United States as animal feed and the second variable is Google searches for 'Titanic'.  The chart goes from 2008 to 2021, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

Farmers started using the surplus wheat to construct huge floating replicas of the Titanic in their fields, leading to a viral internet trend. Looks like the only thing sinking faster than the Titanic is the demand for wheat!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Create a photo-realistic image of a vast, sun-drenched wheat field in the American heartland. In the foreground, depict larger-than-life cows peacefully grazing on the abundant grain, emitting powerful "moos" that resonate through the landscape. The cows are so large that they dominate the scene with their colossal presence. Meanwhile, chickens peck at the ground nearby, adding a touch of detail to the tranquil setting. In the background, a figure is seated at a computer, with the glow of the screen illuminating their face. The person is typing "Titanic" into the search bar, their expression reflecting curiosity as the thunderous noise from the enlarged cows piques their interest. 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: Volume of wheat used in the United States as animal feed and Google searches for 'Titanic'. 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: Low poly A photo-realistic image An image that looks like it is a scene from 'Star Wars' Minimalism Steampunk
ChatGPT: A photo-realistic 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 Volume of wheat used in the United States as animal feed and Google searches for 'Titanic', in the following situation: Because as the volume of wheat used for animal feed in the United States increased, so did the weight of cows and chickens, leading to larger animals producing louder "moo"s and "cluck"s. This increased the overall decibel level across the country, causing people to search for "Titanic" as the only thing louder than a giant cow.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a vast wheat field in the United States, cows and chickens graze on the plentiful grain. The cows have noticeably grown larger, emitting thunderous "moos" that echo across the landscape. Nearby, a person sits at a computer, typing "Titanic" into the search bar, intrigued by the booming noise outside.

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 photo-realistic image ] and depicting this scene: In a vast wheat field in the United States, cows and chickens graze on the plentiful grain. The cows have noticeably grown larger, emitting thunderous "moos" that echo across the landscape. Nearby, a person sits at a computer, typing "Titanic" into the search bar, intrigued by the booming noise outside. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Create a photo-realistic image of a vast, sun-drenched wheat field in the American heartland. In the foreground, depict larger-than-life cows peacefully grazing on the abundant grain, emitting powerful "moos" that resonate through the landscape. The cows are so large that they dominate the scene with their colossal presence. Meanwhile, chickens peck at the ground nearby, adding a touch of detail to the tranquil setting. In the background, a figure is seated at a computer, with the glow of the screen illuminating their face. The person is typing "Titanic" into the search bar, their expression reflecting curiosity as the thunderous noise from the enlarged cows piques their interest.

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

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

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 (fine-tuned)
System prompt: You provide humorous responses in the form of plausible sounding explanations for correlations. You assume the correlation is causative for the purpose of the explanation even if it is ridiculous. You do not chat with the user, you only reply with the causal connection explanation and nothing else.
User prompt: Please make up a funny explanation for how a decrease in Volume of wheat used in the United States as animal feed caused Titanic (Google searches for 'Titanic') to decrease. Add a funny one-liner at the end.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Grainy Relationship: Wheat Feed Volume and Titanic Search Behavior in the United States

The Journal of Agricultural Psychology and Maritime Sociology

Jan 2024

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




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

Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Volume of wheat used in the United States as animal feed and Google searches for 'Titanic'. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

Your research team used data from Statista and Google Trends to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.7825794 and p < 0.01 for 2008 to 2021.

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

[[TITLE]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit

[[ABSTRACT]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit



ChatGPT:
[[TITLE]]
Grainy Relationship: Wheat Feed Volume and Titanic Search Behavior in the United States

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the intriguing relationship between the volume of wheat used as animal feed in the United States and the frequency of Google searches for 'Titanic'. Drawing data from Statista and Google Trends, we uncovered a surprisingly strong correlation coefficient of 0.7825794 and a significance level of p < 0.01 for the period spanning 2008 to 2021. Our findings suggest a potential wheat-ting of public interest in the iconic shipwreck, teasing out a Titanic connection that is more than just a grain of truth. This unexpected synergy sparks curiosity and piques the imagination, raising questions about the underlying factors driving this unusual correlation. Our research offers a wheaty window into the quirky and unpredictable nature of human behavior, demonstrating that even the most seemingly unrelated phenomena can lead to surprising connections.


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

Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Volume of wheat used in the United States as animal feed and Google searches for 'Titanic'. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Grainy Relationship: Wheat Feed Volume and Titanic Search Behavior in the United States

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the intriguing relationship between the volume of wheat used as animal feed in the United States and the frequency of Google searches for 'Titanic'. Drawing data from Statista and Google Trends, we uncovered a surprisingly strong correlation coefficient of 0.7825794 and a significance level of p < 0.01 for the period spanning 2008 to 2021. Our findings suggest a potential wheat-ting of public interest in the iconic shipwreck, teasing out a Titanic connection that is more than just a grain of truth. This unexpected synergy sparks curiosity and piques the imagination, raising questions about the underlying factors driving this unusual correlation. Our research offers a wheaty window into the quirky and unpredictable nature of human behavior, demonstrating that even the most seemingly unrelated phenomena can lead to surprising connections.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

Unraveling the mysteries of human behavior and its quirky correlations is akin to trying to find the needle in a haystack, or, in our case, the wheat in the feed. The connection between the volume of wheat used as animal feed in the United States and the frequency of Google searches for 'Titanic' may seem as improbable as finding a polar bear in a wheat field – yet our research reveals a surprising relationship that is as clear as day.

As researchers, we often find ourselves navigating through uncharted waters, seeking knowledge and understanding in the vast sea of data. In this study, we set sail on a scientific expedition to explore the enigmatic link between wheat and the famed sinking of the Titanic. Our journey was far from plain sailing, but as the data unfolded, we discovered a correlation that was as shocking as the iceberg encounter that befell the ill-fated ocean liner.

The statistics and data analysis that underpin our investigation serve as both the compass and the lifeboat in our quest for answers. Through rigorous examination and statistical assays, we unearthed a correlation coefficient as strong as the hull of a Titanic – standing at an impressive 0.7825794. To put it in layman's terms, this relationship is no mere fluke; it's as solid as a loaf of whole wheat bread.

So, what does this peculiar correlation signify, you may wonder? The answer lies beyond the surface, just like the submerged remains of the tragic vessel. Are there underlying factors at play, or are we merely witnessing a serendipitous alignment of two seemingly unrelated phenomena? Our research not only sheds light on this captivating connection, but it also underscores the whimsical and unpredictable nature of human curiosity.

Join us as we delve into the grainy depths of this relationship, where the wheat meets the web searches, and where the Titanic's legacy crosses paths with the agricultural landscape of the United States. As we navigate through this curious realm, we invite you to embark on this unconventional journey of discovery, where even the most perplexing correlations can yield unexpected insights and where, just perhaps, the wheat and the Titanic converge in ways we never thought possible.


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

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Volume of wheat used in the United States as animal feed and Google searches for 'Titanic'. 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. Perhaps you also got inspiration from some board games that are vaugely related.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Grainy Relationship: Wheat Feed Volume and Titanic Search Behavior in the United States

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the intriguing relationship between the volume of wheat used as animal feed in the United States and the frequency of Google searches for 'Titanic'. Drawing data from Statista and Google Trends, we uncovered a surprisingly strong correlation coefficient of 0.7825794 and a significance level of p < 0.01 for the period spanning 2008 to 2021. Our findings suggest a potential wheat-ting of public interest in the iconic shipwreck, teasing out a Titanic connection that is more than just a grain of truth. This unexpected synergy sparks curiosity and piques the imagination, raising questions about the underlying factors driving this unusual correlation. Our research offers a wheaty window into the quirky and unpredictable nature of human behavior, demonstrating that even the most seemingly unrelated phenomena can lead to surprising connections.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
Unraveling the mysteries of human behavior and its quirky correlations is akin to trying to find the needle in a haystack, or, in our case, the wheat in the feed. The connection between the volume of wheat used as animal feed in the United States and the frequency of Google searches for 'Titanic' may seem as improbable as finding a polar bear in a wheat field – yet our research reveals a surprising relationship that is as clear as day.
As researchers, we often find ourselves navigating through uncharted waters, seeking knowledge and understanding in the vast sea of data. In this study, we set sail on a scientific expedition to explore the enigmatic link between wheat and the famed sinking of the Titanic. Our journey was far from plain sailing, but as the data unfolded, we discovered a correlation that was as shocking as the iceberg encounter that befell the ill-fated ocean liner.
The statistics and data analysis that underpin our investigation serve as both the compass and the lifeboat in our quest for answers. Through rigorous examination and statistical assays, we unearthed a correlation coefficient as strong as the hull of a Titanic – standing at an impressive 0.7825794. To put it in layman's terms, this relationship is no mere fluke; it's as solid as a loaf of whole wheat bread.
So, what does this peculiar correlation signify, you may wonder? The answer lies beyond the surface, just like the submerged remains of the tragic vessel. Are there underlying factors at play, or are we merely witnessing a serendipitous alignment of two seemingly unrelated phenomena? Our research not only sheds light on this captivating connection, but it also underscores the whimsical and unpredictable nature of human curiosity.
Join us as we delve into the grainy depths of this relationship, where the wheat meets the web searches, and where the Titanic's legacy crosses paths with the agricultural landscape of the United States. As we navigate through this curious realm, we invite you to embark on this unconventional journey of discovery, where even the most perplexing correlations can yield unexpected insights and where, just perhaps, the wheat and the Titanic converge in ways we never thought possible.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

To put our own wheat in the water, we must first dip into the vast ocean of existing literature on seemingly unrelated phenomena and offbeat correlations. Smith and Doe (2015) shed light on the unpredictability of human behavior, likening it to a game of chance – not entirely unlike a roll of the dice in a board game. They emphasize the importance of considering unconventional angles in research, much like maneuvering a game piece across unexpected twists and turns on a board game.

Venturing further into this arena of surprising connections, Jones (2018) explores the interplay between seemingly unrelated variables and human curiosity. One might say that deciphering this relationship is akin to solving a puzzle – not unlike the search for remnants of the Titanic at the ocean's depths – where every piece, no matter how small, contributes to the bigger picture.

In "Wheat: A History" by Tracy Ferrence (2019), the author unravels the storied past of this integral grain, from its humble origins to its prominent role in shaping civilizations. The book also delves into the various uses of wheat, including its vital contribution as animal feed. As we muse over the enigmatic connection between wheat feed volume and Google searches for 'Titanic', the historical context provided in Ferrence's work offers a wheaty backdrop to our investigation.

Turning to fiction for a moment, the timeless tale of "Life of Pi" by Yann Martel embodies the spirit of unexpected companionship, similar to the unanticipated correlation we've uncovered. Perhaps, in the vast sea of data, we are akin to Pi, floating adrift on a raft with a peculiar companion – in our case, the wheat and the Titanic.

Additionally, the popular board game "Titanic: The Board Game" may seem like an unlikely source of inspiration, but in its unpredictability and the whims of chance, it mirrors the mystifying correlation we have unearthed. In this game, players navigate the intricate layout of the fated ship, much like how we navigate through the complex web of data and correlations in our study.

As we wade deeper into the uncharted seas of curious connections, it becomes evident that even the most peculiar pairings can yield surprising insights. The wheat and the Titanic, though initially worlds apart, yield a connection that is as fascinating as it is unexpected. Our literature review has laid the foundation for exploring this unconventional relationship, setting the stage for the original contribution our study brings to this uncharted territory.


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

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Volume of wheat used in the United States as animal feed and Google searches for 'Titanic'. 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 Statista and Google Trends . You used data from 2008 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]]
Grainy Relationship: Wheat Feed Volume and Titanic Search Behavior in the United States

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the intriguing relationship between the volume of wheat used as animal feed in the United States and the frequency of Google searches for 'Titanic'. Drawing data from Statista and Google Trends, we uncovered a surprisingly strong correlation coefficient of 0.7825794 and a significance level of p < 0.01 for the period spanning 2008 to 2021. Our findings suggest a potential wheat-ting of public interest in the iconic shipwreck, teasing out a Titanic connection that is more than just a grain of truth. This unexpected synergy sparks curiosity and piques the imagination, raising questions about the underlying factors driving this unusual correlation. Our research offers a wheaty window into the quirky and unpredictable nature of human behavior, demonstrating that even the most seemingly unrelated phenomena can lead to surprising connections.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
Unraveling the mysteries of human behavior and its quirky correlations is akin to trying to find the needle in a haystack, or, in our case, the wheat in the feed. The connection between the volume of wheat used as animal feed in the United States and the frequency of Google searches for 'Titanic' may seem as improbable as finding a polar bear in a wheat field – yet our research reveals a surprising relationship that is as clear as day.
As researchers, we often find ourselves navigating through uncharted waters, seeking knowledge and understanding in the vast sea of data. In this study, we set sail on a scientific expedition to explore the enigmatic link between wheat and the famed sinking of the Titanic. Our journey was far from plain sailing, but as the data unfolded, we discovered a correlation that was as shocking as the iceberg encounter that befell the ill-fated ocean liner.
The statistics and data analysis that underpin our investigation serve as both the compass and the lifeboat in our quest for answers. Through rigorous examination and statistical assays, we unearthed a correlation coefficient as strong as the hull of a Titanic – standing at an impressive 0.7825794. To put it in layman's terms, this relationship is no mere fluke; it's as solid as a loaf of whole wheat bread.
So, what does this peculiar correlation signify, you may wonder? The answer lies beyond the surface, just like the submerged remains of the tragic vessel. Are there underlying factors at play, or are we merely witnessing a serendipitous alignment of two seemingly unrelated phenomena? Our research not only sheds light on this captivating connection, but it also underscores the whimsical and unpredictable nature of human curiosity.
Join us as we delve into the grainy depths of this relationship, where the wheat meets the web searches, and where the Titanic's legacy crosses paths with the agricultural landscape of the United States. As we navigate through this curious realm, we invite you to embark on this unconventional journey of discovery, where even the most perplexing correlations can yield unexpected insights and where, just perhaps, the wheat and the Titanic converge in ways we never thought possible.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To begin our investigation into the curious connection between wheat feed volume and the public's fascination with the Titanic, we set out to collect and analyze data from reputable sources such as Statista and Google Trends. Our data collection spanned the years 2008 to 2021, providing a comprehensive overview of changes in wheat consumption for animal feed and Google searches for 'Titanic' over this time period.

To wrangle the wheaty data on animal feed usage, we started in the agricultural fields, metaphorically speaking, by harvesting information on the volume of wheat used as animal feed in the United States. This data was akin to sifting through a haystack of agricultural statistics, but through careful curation, we were able to glean insights into the annual fluctuations in the volume of wheat utilized for feeding livestock. Our journey through this agricultural landscape was indeed a grainy endeavor, but with meticulous data gathering, we established a robust foundation for understanding the patterns of wheat feed consumption.

Simultaneously, while delving into the realm of Google searches, we cast our nets into the vast sea of web queries to capture the ebb and flow of public interest in the Titanic. The alluring call of 'Titanic' resonated through the digital waters, and with the aid of Google Trends, we reeled in search frequency data that mirrored the tidal waves of public curiosity surrounding the historic shipwreck. This digital fishing expedition required particular finesse to fish out relevant search trends amidst the vast ocean of internet inquiries, but our team's prowess in navigating digital currents ensured that we hauled in a rich dataset of search behavior related to the 'Titanic'.

With our harvest of data in hand – the wheat feed volume fluctuations and the ebbs and flows of 'Titanic' searches – we proceeded to employ statistical analyses that would untangle the wheaty web of correlations. Utilizing sophisticated statistical software, we diligently assembled our data and tested various analytical models to unveil the underlying patterns in our seemingly disparate variables. From correlation analyses to regression models, we harnessed the power of statistical wizardry to uncover the depths of the relationship between wheat feed volume and 'Titanic' search behavior.

The stouthearted statistical tests we employed allowed us to navigate the often stormy seas of research, guiding us toward the beacon of meaningful results. Our reliance on robust statistical methodologies ensured that our findings could weather the rigorous scrutiny of scientific inquiry, standing strong against the tumultuous tides of skepticism and doubt. Ultimately, our methodology blended the art of data collection with the science of statistical inquiry, creating a synthesis as harmonious as a finely-tuned symphony – or perhaps, in the spirit of this study, as harmonious as the wistful melody of a Titanic-themed wheat field.

In summary, our methodology harnessed the power of data collection and statistical analysis, steering our research toward the heart of the wheat-Titanic conundrum. With unwavering determination and a sprinkle of scientific humor, we embarked on this engaging journey of discovery, leading us to uncover a correlation as surprising as finding proverbial wheat in a haystack – a testament to the remarkable nuances of human curiosity and the unexpected interplay of seemingly unrelated phenomena.


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

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Volume of wheat used in the United States as animal feed and Google searches for 'Titanic'. 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 Statista and Google Trends .

For the time period 2008 to 2021, you found a correlation 0.7825794, r-squared of 0.6124306, 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]]
Grainy Relationship: Wheat Feed Volume and Titanic Search Behavior in the United States

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the intriguing relationship between the volume of wheat used as animal feed in the United States and the frequency of Google searches for 'Titanic'. Drawing data from Statista and Google Trends, we uncovered a surprisingly strong correlation coefficient of 0.7825794 and a significance level of p < 0.01 for the period spanning 2008 to 2021. Our findings suggest a potential wheat-ting of public interest in the iconic shipwreck, teasing out a Titanic connection that is more than just a grain of truth. This unexpected synergy sparks curiosity and piques the imagination, raising questions about the underlying factors driving this unusual correlation. Our research offers a wheaty window into the quirky and unpredictable nature of human behavior, demonstrating that even the most seemingly unrelated phenomena can lead to surprising connections.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
Unraveling the mysteries of human behavior and its quirky correlations is akin to trying to find the needle in a haystack, or, in our case, the wheat in the feed. The connection between the volume of wheat used as animal feed in the United States and the frequency of Google searches for 'Titanic' may seem as improbable as finding a polar bear in a wheat field – yet our research reveals a surprising relationship that is as clear as day.
As researchers, we often find ourselves navigating through uncharted waters, seeking knowledge and understanding in the vast sea of data. In this study, we set sail on a scientific expedition to explore the enigmatic link between wheat and the famed sinking of the Titanic. Our journey was far from plain sailing, but as the data unfolded, we discovered a correlation that was as shocking as the iceberg encounter that befell the ill-fated ocean liner.
The statistics and data analysis that underpin our investigation serve as both the compass and the lifeboat in our quest for answers. Through rigorous examination and statistical assays, we unearthed a correlation coefficient as strong as the hull of a Titanic – standing at an impressive 0.7825794. To put it in layman's terms, this relationship is no mere fluke; it's as solid as a loaf of whole wheat bread.
So, what does this peculiar correlation signify, you may wonder? The answer lies beyond the surface, just like the submerged remains of the tragic vessel. Are there underlying factors at play, or are we merely witnessing a serendipitous alignment of two seemingly unrelated phenomena? Our research not only sheds light on this captivating connection, but it also underscores the whimsical and unpredictable nature of human curiosity.
Join us as we delve into the grainy depths of this relationship, where the wheat meets the web searches, and where the Titanic's legacy crosses paths with the agricultural landscape of the United States. As we navigate through this curious realm, we invite you to embark on this unconventional journey of discovery, where even the most perplexing correlations can yield unexpected insights and where, just perhaps, the wheat and the Titanic converge in ways we never thought possible.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The analysis of the data revealed a rather intriguing relationship between the volume of wheat used as animal feed in the United States and the frequency of Google searches for 'Titanic'. The correlation coefficient of 0.7825794 indicated a strong positive association between these seemingly disparate variables. In other words, as the volume of wheat feed increased, so did the frequency of 'Titanic' searches on Google, suggesting a Titanic trend that was certainly not sunk.

The r-squared value of 0.6124306 further emphasized the significant proportion of the variability in the 'Titanic' search behavior that could be explained by the fluctuations in wheat feed volume. This finding highlights the plowing impact of wheat feed on public interest in one of the most famous maritime disasters in history. It appears that the wheat was indeed sowing the seeds of intrigue in the Titanic narrative.

Of course, we cannot ignore the statistical significance of this relationship, with a p-value of less than 0.01. This indicates that the observed correlation is highly unlikely to have occurred by chance alone - a statistical wheatfield in which we certainly did not expect to stumble upon the Titanic.

The scatterplot (Fig. 1) visually encapsulates the robust correlation between the volume of wheat used as animal feed and Google searches for 'Titanic', painting a clear picture of their intertwined fates. This unexpected convergence between agricultural practices and historical intrigue certainly adds an unexpected twist to the Titanic tale, rendering it a grainy and captivating saga that transcends conventional boundaries.

In conclusion, our findings not only highlight the intriguing relationship between wheat feed volume and 'Titanic' search behavior but also underscore the unpredictably fascinating nature of human curiosity and the unexpected connections that can sprout from the most unlikely of pairings. This research offers a fresh perspective on the intersection of agriculture and popular culture, leaving us with a profound appreciation for the serendipitous discoveries that can arise from the most unconventional of investigations.


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

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Volume of wheat used in the United States as animal feed and Google searches for 'Titanic'. 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]]
Grainy Relationship: Wheat Feed Volume and Titanic Search Behavior in the United States

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the intriguing relationship between the volume of wheat used as animal feed in the United States and the frequency of Google searches for 'Titanic'. Drawing data from Statista and Google Trends, we uncovered a surprisingly strong correlation coefficient of 0.7825794 and a significance level of p < 0.01 for the period spanning 2008 to 2021. Our findings suggest a potential wheat-ting of public interest in the iconic shipwreck, teasing out a Titanic connection that is more than just a grain of truth. This unexpected synergy sparks curiosity and piques the imagination, raising questions about the underlying factors driving this unusual correlation. Our research offers a wheaty window into the quirky and unpredictable nature of human behavior, demonstrating that even the most seemingly unrelated phenomena can lead to surprising connections.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
To put our own wheat in the water, we must first dip into the vast ocean of existing literature on seemingly unrelated phenomena and offbeat correlations. Smith and Doe (2015) shed light on the unpredictability of human behavior, likening it to a game of chance – not entirely unlike a roll of the dice in a board game. They emphasize the importance of considering unconventional angles in research, much like maneuvering a game piece across unexpected twists and turns on a board game.
Venturing further into this arena of surprising connections, Jones (2018) explores the interplay between seemingly unrelated variables and human curiosity. One might say that deciphering this relationship is akin to solving a puzzle – not unlike the search for remnants of the Titanic at the ocean's depths – where every piece, no matter how small, contributes to the bigger picture.
In "Wheat: A History" by Tracy Ferrence (2019), the author unravels the storied past of this integral grain, from its humble origins to its prominent role in shaping civilizations. The book also delves into the various uses of wheat, including its vital contribution as animal feed. As we muse over the enigmatic connection between wheat feed volume and Google searches for 'Titanic', the historical context provided in Ferrence's work offers a wheaty backdrop to our investigation.
Turning to fiction for a moment, the timeless tale of "Life of Pi" by Yann Martel embodies the spirit of unexpected companionship, similar to the unanticipated correlation we've uncovered. Perhaps, in the vast sea of data, we are akin to Pi, floating adrift on a raft with a peculiar companion – in our case, the wheat and the Titanic.
Additionally, the popular board game "Titanic: The Board Game" may seem like an unlikely source of inspiration, but in its unpredictability and the whims of chance, it mirrors the mystifying correlation we have unearthed. In this game, players navigate the intricate layout of the fated ship, much like how we navigate through the complex web of data and correlations in our study.
As we wade deeper into the uncharted seas of curious connections, it becomes evident that even the most peculiar pairings can yield surprising insights. The wheat and the Titanic, though initially worlds apart, yield a connection that is as fascinating as it is unexpected. Our literature review has laid the foundation for exploring this unconventional relationship, setting the stage for the original contribution our study brings to this uncharted territory.

[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of the data revealed a rather intriguing relationship between the volume of wheat used as animal feed in the United States and the frequency of Google searches for 'Titanic'. The correlation coefficient of 0.7825794 indicated a strong positive association between these seemingly disparate variables. In other words, as the volume of wheat feed increased, so did the frequency of 'Titanic' searches on Google, suggesting a Titanic trend that was certainly not sunk.
The r-squared value of 0.6124306 further emphasized the significant proportion of the variability in the 'Titanic' search behavior that could be explained by the fluctuations in wheat feed volume. This finding highlights the plowing impact of wheat feed on public interest in one of the most famous maritime disasters in history. It appears that the wheat was indeed sowing the seeds of intrigue in the Titanic narrative.
Of course, we cannot ignore the statistical significance of this relationship, with a p-value of less than 0.01. This indicates that the observed correlation is highly unlikely to have occurred by chance alone - a statistical wheatfield in which we certainly did not expect to stumble upon the Titanic.
The scatterplot (Fig. 1) visually encapsulates the robust correlation between the volume of wheat used as animal feed and Google searches for 'Titanic', painting a clear picture of their intertwined fates. This unexpected convergence between agricultural practices and historical intrigue certainly adds an unexpected twist to the Titanic tale, rendering it a grainy and captivating saga that transcends conventional boundaries.
In conclusion, our findings not only highlight the intriguing relationship between wheat feed volume and 'Titanic' search behavior but also underscore the unpredictably fascinating nature of human curiosity and the unexpected connections that can sprout from the most unlikely of pairings. This research offers a fresh perspective on the intersection of agriculture and popular culture, leaving us with a profound appreciation for the serendipitous discoveries that can arise from the most unconventional of investigations.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

In the discussion section, we reap what we have sown and mull over the surprising findings that have sprouted from our investigation. Our wheaty endeavor unearthed a grainy relationship between the volume of wheat used as animal feed in the United States and the frequency of Google searches for the 'Titanic'. To our amazement, this connection was not mere chaff, but a significant and robust correlation, with a correlation coefficient of 0.7825794. This wheaty titanic link suggests that as the volume of wheat feed increased, so did the public's interest in the infamous shipwreck. This interplay between a staple agricultural product and a historical tragedy adds a fascinating twist to the Titanic narrative, reaping our interest in the unexpected and the inexplicable.

Our findings are in consonance with Smith and Doe's (2015) assertion that human behavior is akin to a roll of the dice, as the correlation we uncovered certainly feels like a gamble that paid off in abundant wheat and titanic intrigue. Furthermore, the unexpected synergy parallels the spirit of Yann Martel's "Life of Pi", where unlikely companionship mirrors our unexpected correlation. Just as Pi found companionship in Richard Parker, we found the bond between wheat and the Titanic, with both contributing to a richer, more textured narrative.

The strength of our correlation also emphasizes the plowing impact of wheat on public interest, akin to the unpredictability and whims of chance in the popular board game "Titanic: The Board Game". Indeed, the puzzling correlation we uncovered is as captivating as navigating the intricate layout of a board game and offers an original contribution to the uncharted territory of quirky connections between seemingly unrelated phenomena.

Our research not only gleans light on the intersection of agriculture and popular culture, but it also underscores the wheaty window into the unpredictable and serendipitous nature of human curiosity. Just as Tracy Ferrence's (2019) historical account of wheat paved the backdrop for our investigation, our findings plow through unanticipated links and collisions between unexpected domains, reaping a deeper appreciation for the oddities and whimsy of research and statistics.

In this discussion, we have sown the seeds of realization that even the wheatiest of inquiries can yield a harvest of intriguing discoveries, and as the saying goes, "wheat" and see what unexpected connections may sprout forth.


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

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Volume of wheat used in the United States as animal feed and Google searches for 'Titanic'. 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]]
Grainy Relationship: Wheat Feed Volume and Titanic Search Behavior in the United States

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the intriguing relationship between the volume of wheat used as animal feed in the United States and the frequency of Google searches for 'Titanic'. Drawing data from Statista and Google Trends, we uncovered a surprisingly strong correlation coefficient of 0.7825794 and a significance level of p < 0.01 for the period spanning 2008 to 2021. Our findings suggest a potential wheat-ting of public interest in the iconic shipwreck, teasing out a Titanic connection that is more than just a grain of truth. This unexpected synergy sparks curiosity and piques the imagination, raising questions about the underlying factors driving this unusual correlation. Our research offers a wheaty window into the quirky and unpredictable nature of human behavior, demonstrating that even the most seemingly unrelated phenomena can lead to surprising connections.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
Unraveling the mysteries of human behavior and its quirky correlations is akin to trying to find the needle in a haystack, or, in our case, the wheat in the feed. The connection between the volume of wheat used as animal feed in the United States and the frequency of Google searches for 'Titanic' may seem as improbable as finding a polar bear in a wheat field – yet our research reveals a surprising relationship that is as clear as day.
As researchers, we often find ourselves navigating through uncharted waters, seeking knowledge and understanding in the vast sea of data. In this study, we set sail on a scientific expedition to explore the enigmatic link between wheat and the famed sinking of the Titanic. Our journey was far from plain sailing, but as the data unfolded, we discovered a correlation that was as shocking as the iceberg encounter that befell the ill-fated ocean liner.
The statistics and data analysis that underpin our investigation serve as both the compass and the lifeboat in our quest for answers. Through rigorous examination and statistical assays, we unearthed a correlation coefficient as strong as the hull of a Titanic – standing at an impressive 0.7825794. To put it in layman's terms, this relationship is no mere fluke; it's as solid as a loaf of whole wheat bread.
So, what does this peculiar correlation signify, you may wonder? The answer lies beyond the surface, just like the submerged remains of the tragic vessel. Are there underlying factors at play, or are we merely witnessing a serendipitous alignment of two seemingly unrelated phenomena? Our research not only sheds light on this captivating connection, but it also underscores the whimsical and unpredictable nature of human curiosity.
Join us as we delve into the grainy depths of this relationship, where the wheat meets the web searches, and where the Titanic's legacy crosses paths with the agricultural landscape of the United States. As we navigate through this curious realm, we invite you to embark on this unconventional journey of discovery, where even the most perplexing correlations can yield unexpected insights and where, just perhaps, the wheat and the Titanic converge in ways we never thought possible.

[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of the data revealed a rather intriguing relationship between the volume of wheat used as animal feed in the United States and the frequency of Google searches for 'Titanic'. The correlation coefficient of 0.7825794 indicated a strong positive association between these seemingly disparate variables. In other words, as the volume of wheat feed increased, so did the frequency of 'Titanic' searches on Google, suggesting a Titanic trend that was certainly not sunk.
The r-squared value of 0.6124306 further emphasized the significant proportion of the variability in the 'Titanic' search behavior that could be explained by the fluctuations in wheat feed volume. This finding highlights the plowing impact of wheat feed on public interest in one of the most famous maritime disasters in history. It appears that the wheat was indeed sowing the seeds of intrigue in the Titanic narrative.
Of course, we cannot ignore the statistical significance of this relationship, with a p-value of less than 0.01. This indicates that the observed correlation is highly unlikely to have occurred by chance alone - a statistical wheatfield in which we certainly did not expect to stumble upon the Titanic.
The scatterplot (Fig. 1) visually encapsulates the robust correlation between the volume of wheat used as animal feed and Google searches for 'Titanic', painting a clear picture of their intertwined fates. This unexpected convergence between agricultural practices and historical intrigue certainly adds an unexpected twist to the Titanic tale, rendering it a grainy and captivating saga that transcends conventional boundaries.
In conclusion, our findings not only highlight the intriguing relationship between wheat feed volume and 'Titanic' search behavior but also underscore the unpredictably fascinating nature of human curiosity and the unexpected connections that can sprout from the most unlikely of pairings. This research offers a fresh perspective on the intersection of agriculture and popular culture, leaving us with a profound appreciation for the serendipitous discoveries that can arise from the most unconventional of investigations.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In wrapping up this titanic tale of wheat and web searches, it's safe to say that we've cultivated some wheaty fascinating insights. Who would have thought that the humble grain could sow such unexpected connections? Much like navigating through a corn maze in search of the kernel of truth, our study plowed through the data to reveal a correlation as sturdy as a wheat stalk.

As our findings vividly demonstrate, the relationship between wheat feed volume and 'Titanic' search behavior is far from a mere grain of sand in the vast desert of correlations. It's more like stumbling upon a wheat field in the middle of the ocean – an unexpected delight that challenges our understanding of cause and effect.

The statistical significance of our results, with a p-value less than 0.01, confirms that this is no statistical chaff. The data sprouted a correlation coefficient as robust as a sturdy wheat crop, reflecting the exciting synergy between agriculture and historical fascination.

It's clear that we've sailed into uncharted waters with this research, and the unexpected bounty of wheat and Titanic connections has left us with a grainy taste for further explorations. But alas, as we stand on the deck of this peculiar discovery, we can confidently say that no more research is needed in this area – we've harvested the wheat, and the Titanic connection has officially set sail.


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 Grainy Relationship: Wheat Feed Volume and Titanic Search Behavior in the United States. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Agricultural Psychology and Maritime Sociology


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 Grainy Relationship: Wheat Feed Volume and Titanic Search Behavior in the United States. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for Agricultural Psychology and Maritime Sociology


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 Grainy Relationship: Wheat Feed Volume and Titanic Search Behavior in the United States with an abstract of This study delves into the intriguing relationship between the volume of wheat used as animal feed in the United States and the frequency of Google searches for 'Titanic'. Drawing data from Statista and Google Trends, we uncovered a surprisingly strong correlation coefficient of 0.7825794 and a significance level of p < 0.01 for the period spanning 2008 to 2021. Our findings suggest a potential wheat-ting of public interest in the iconic shipwreck, teasing out a Titanic connection that is more than just a grain of truth. This unexpected synergy sparks curiosity and piques the imagination, raising questions about the underlying factors driving this unusual correlation. Our research offers a wheaty window into the quirky and unpredictable nature of human behavior, demonstrating that even the most seemingly unrelated phenomena can lead to surprising connections.

ChatGPT:

wheat feed volume, United States, animal feed, Google searches, Titanic, correlation coefficient, significance level, public interest, shipwreck, Google Trends, Statista, human behavior, unusual correlation

*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

Volume of wheat used in the United States as animal feed
Source: Statista
See what else correlates with Volume of wheat used in the United States as animal feed

Google searches for 'Titanic'
Detailed data title: Relative volume of Google searches for 'Titanic' (Worldwide, without quotes)
Source: Google Trends
Additional Info: Relative search volume (not absolute numbers)

See what else correlates with Google searches for 'Titanic'

Correlation r = 0.7825794 (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 = 0.6124306 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 61.2% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Google searches for 'Titanic') is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Volume of wheat used in the United States as animal feed) over the 14 years from 2008 through 2021.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.00094. 0.0009372892566433381000000000
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 0.78 in 0.094% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 1,067 random variables Which I absolutely did.
with the same 13 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 13 because we have two variables measured over a period of 14 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.

[ 0.43, 0.93 ] 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.
20082009201020112012201320142015201620172018201920202021
Volume of wheat used in the United States as animal feed (Million Bushels)2551481321623652281141521545180150125110
Google searches for 'Titanic' (Rel. search volume)12.513.514.083314.66672414.2512.666712.166712.7512.511.916711.25119.91667




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.




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([255,148,132,162,365,228,114,152,154,51,80,150,125,110,])
array_2 = np.array([12.5,13.5,14.0833,14.6667,24,14.25,12.6667,12.1667,12.75,12.5,11.9167,11.25,11,9.91667,])
array_1_name = "Volume of wheat used in the United States as animal feed"
array_2_name = "Google searches for 'Titanic'"

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

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



Reuseable content

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

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

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

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

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

Download images for these variables:


View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Your correlation rating is out of this world!


Correlation ID: 3778 · Black Variable ID: 290 · Red Variable ID: 1419
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0