about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #3,852 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Popularity of the first name Dayna and the second variable is Air pollution in Milwaukee.  The chart goes from 1980 to 2022, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As the number of Daynas decreased, so did the frequency of personalized "Dayna Air Freshener" production, leading to a significant reduction in air pollution in Milwaukee. Remember, when it comes to cleaner air, every Dayna counts!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Create an image that features a glitched representation of a serene park scene in Milwaukee. In the background, there are lush green trees and a serene pond. The park is empty except for a few scattered cars, with their license plates visibly glitched to only display the name "Dayna." In the air above, glitched particles clear the once-polluted atmosphere, depicting the reduction in air pollution resulting from the phenomenon. The depiction should include only scenes, people, and objects, it should not include text or speech bubbles.
This image generation prompt was also generated by AI, using the following sequence:

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You select one of a few potential scene descriptors that seems to go along with the variables described. You respond only with the scene descriptions provided and say nothing else.
User prompt: Here are two variables: Popularity of the first name Dayna and Air pollution in Milwaukee. 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 TIME magazine cover image Glitch art High-tech Celtic art Glitch art
ChatGPT: Glitch art

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You describe simple visual scenes that depict the two variables stated. You combine both variables into one scene.
User prompt: Please describe a visual scene that prominently depicts both Popularity of the first name Dayna and Air pollution in Milwaukee, in the following situation: Because as the popularity of the name Dayna decreased, fewer parents were naming their children Dayna, leading to a decrease in the number of Danyas driving cars in Milwaukee, thus reducing air pollution.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a park in Milwaukee, there are fewer cars with the name "Dayna" on their license plates and the air is noticeably clearer. The once popular name "Dayna" has become less common, and as a result, the decrease in cars driven by people named "Dayna" has led to a reduction in air pollution in the city.

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: [ Glitch art ] and depicting this scene: In a park in Milwaukee, there are fewer cars with the name "Dayna" on their license plates and the air is noticeably clearer. The once popular name "Dayna" has become less common, and as a result, the decrease in cars driven by people named "Dayna" has led to a reduction in air pollution in the city. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Create an image that features a glitched representation of a serene park scene in Milwaukee. In the background, there are lush green trees and a serene pond. The park is empty except for a few scattered cars, with their license plates visibly glitched to only display the name "Dayna." In the air above, glitched particles clear the once-polluted atmosphere, depicting the reduction in air pollution resulting from the phenomenon.

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

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

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

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
A Breath of Fresh Air: The Dayna Dilemma - Exploring the Relationship Between Name Popularity and Air Pollution in Milwaukee

The Journal of Ecological Trends and Nameology

Jan 2024

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




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

Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Dayna and Air pollution in Milwaukee. 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 US Social Security Administration and Environmental Protection Agency to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.7931498 and p < 0.01 for 1980 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]]
A Breath of Fresh Air: The Dayna Dilemma - Exploring the Relationship Between Name Popularity and Air Pollution in Milwaukee

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we embark on a whimsical quest to explore the perplexing correlation between the popularity of the first name Dayna and the levels of air pollution in Milwaukee. Through an unconventional analysis utilizing data from the US Social Security Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency, we unveil surprising insights. Our findings reveal a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.7931498 and p < 0.01 from 1980 to 2022, leading us to ponder whether the trends in air quality may be predictably influenced by the ebb and flow of Daynas in the Milwaukee populace. As we navigate through this lighthearted investigation, we weave together the threads of baby naming trends and atmospheric conditions, delving into the whimsical world of empirical absurdity. Join us on this peculiar journey as we open a window into the curious intersection of human nomenclature and environmental impact.


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

Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Dayna and Air pollution in Milwaukee. 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]]
A Breath of Fresh Air: The Dayna Dilemma - Exploring the Relationship Between Name Popularity and Air Pollution in Milwaukee

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we embark on a whimsical quest to explore the perplexing correlation between the popularity of the first name Dayna and the levels of air pollution in Milwaukee. Through an unconventional analysis utilizing data from the US Social Security Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency, we unveil surprising insights. Our findings reveal a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.7931498 and p < 0.01 from 1980 to 2022, leading us to ponder whether the trends in air quality may be predictably influenced by the ebb and flow of Daynas in the Milwaukee populace. As we navigate through this lighthearted investigation, we weave together the threads of baby naming trends and atmospheric conditions, delving into the whimsical world of empirical absurdity. Join us on this peculiar journey as we open a window into the curious intersection of human nomenclature and environmental impact.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

Greetings, esteemed colleagues and fellow enthusiasts of the quirky and the curious! In this unprecedented undertaking, we delve deep into the enigmatic nexus of name popularity and atmospheric intricacies. Yes, buckle up, for we are about to embark on a journey through the whimsical corridors of statistical analysis, where the unexpected connections and outrageous correlations await!

Picture this: a buoyant bantam squadron of Daynas, weaving their way through the bustling streets of Milwaukee. Meanwhile, the gentle zephyrs carry an air of intrigue, mingled with a faint whiff of empirical whimsy. It is in this peculiar milieu that the seeds of this endeavor were sown - a lighthearted quest to unravel the seemingly inexplicable link between the eponymous proliferation of Daynas and the ethereal dance of air pollutants.

As we peer through the transparent veil of statistical significance, a rather surprising correlation coefficient of 0.7931498 beckons us forth. While the quintessentially scientific p-value of less than 0.01 calls out from the depths of probability, we find ourselves confronting the extravagance of this tantalizing relationship. With data dating back to the neon-hued decade of 1980 all the way to the digital age of 2022, we have uncovered a pattern that is as confounding as it is captivating.

Now, dear readers, let us not merely skim the cream of empirical absurdity; instead, let us plunge headfirst into the bubbling cauldron of zany hypotheses and whimsical conjectures. And as we wander through this winding maze of name trends and atmospheric conundrums, may we pause to appreciate the comedic undertones that punctuate this scholarly escapade.

Thus, with glee in our hearts and a twinkle in our eyes, we invite you to tag along on this extraordinary odyssey as we endeavor to shed light on the connection between the delightful Dayna and the air we breathe in the city of Milwaukee. So sit back, relax, and fasten your seatbelts, for as we navigate this charming yet puzzling constellation of data, the winds of empirical whimsy are sure to carry us to unforeseen and uproarious vistas!


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

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Dayna and Air pollution in Milwaukee. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

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

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then devolve ever further, and mention something completely ridiculous, like you conducted literature review by reading the backs of shampoo bottles.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
A Breath of Fresh Air: The Dayna Dilemma - Exploring the Relationship Between Name Popularity and Air Pollution in Milwaukee

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we embark on a whimsical quest to explore the perplexing correlation between the popularity of the first name Dayna and the levels of air pollution in Milwaukee. Through an unconventional analysis utilizing data from the US Social Security Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency, we unveil surprising insights. Our findings reveal a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.7931498 and p < 0.01 from 1980 to 2022, leading us to ponder whether the trends in air quality may be predictably influenced by the ebb and flow of Daynas in the Milwaukee populace. As we navigate through this lighthearted investigation, we weave together the threads of baby naming trends and atmospheric conditions, delving into the whimsical world of empirical absurdity. Join us on this peculiar journey as we open a window into the curious intersection of human nomenclature and environmental impact.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
Greetings, esteemed colleagues and fellow enthusiasts of the quirky and the curious! In this unprecedented undertaking, we delve deep into the enigmatic nexus of name popularity and atmospheric intricacies. Yes, buckle up, for we are about to embark on a journey through the whimsical corridors of statistical analysis, where the unexpected connections and outrageous correlations await!
Picture this: a buoyant bantam squadron of Daynas, weaving their way through the bustling streets of Milwaukee. Meanwhile, the gentle zephyrs carry an air of intrigue, mingled with a faint whiff of empirical whimsy. It is in this peculiar milieu that the seeds of this endeavor were sown - a lighthearted quest to unravel the seemingly inexplicable link between the eponymous proliferation of Daynas and the ethereal dance of air pollutants.
As we peer through the transparent veil of statistical significance, a rather surprising correlation coefficient of 0.7931498 beckons us forth. While the quintessentially scientific p-value of less than 0.01 calls out from the depths of probability, we find ourselves confronting the extravagance of this tantalizing relationship. With data dating back to the neon-hued decade of 1980 all the way to the digital age of 2022, we have uncovered a pattern that is as confounding as it is captivating.
Now, dear readers, let us not merely skim the cream of empirical absurdity; instead, let us plunge headfirst into the bubbling cauldron of zany hypotheses and whimsical conjectures. And as we wander through this winding maze of name trends and atmospheric conundrums, may we pause to appreciate the comedic undertones that punctuate this scholarly escapade.
Thus, with glee in our hearts and a twinkle in our eyes, we invite you to tag along on this extraordinary odyssey as we endeavor to shed light on the connection between the delightful Dayna and the air we breathe in the city of Milwaukee. So sit back, relax, and fasten your seatbelts, for as we navigate this charming yet puzzling constellation of data, the winds of empirical whimsy are sure to carry us to unforeseen and uproarious vistas!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

Much like an intrepid explorer venturing into uncharted territory, we set out to brave the convoluted terrain of literature surrounding the interplay of name popularity and environmental factors. Our journey begins with a solemn nod to the esteemed works of Smith, Doe, and Jones, who, in their hallmark studies "Names and Numbers" and "Cityscape Chronicles," laid the groundwork for understanding the enigmatic dynamics of nomenclature and urban atmospheres. Building upon their scholarly endeavors, we dive into the depths of quirky correlations and whimsical revelations.

As we navigate through this ethereal labyrinth of inquiry, we encounter the works of environmental activists and urban planners, shedding light on the complexities of air pollution in metropolitan areas. "Breathless in the City" by CleanAir Crusaders offers a poignant narrative of the struggle for cleaner air, albeit without a single mention of Dayna or its impact on air quality. Nevertheless, we press on, turning our attention to the sphere of baby naming trends with "The Name Game" by Pop Culture Prodigy, which illuminates the zeitgeist of moniker preferences but, regrettably, lacks any reference to atmospheric influences.

From the realm of non-fiction, we venture into the world of fiction, where the works of authors such as John Green and J.K. Rowling beckon to us with their tantalizing storylines. Could it be that hidden within the pages of "The Fault in Our Stars" or "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets" lies the key to unraveling the peculiar connection between Dayna and air pollution? Alas, while the literary escapades provide enchanting diversion, they offer little insight into our curious conundrum.

Undeterred by the limitations of conventional research sources, we dare to seek knowledge in the most unexpected of places. Yes, dear reader, we confess that in our pursuit of enlightenment, we have delved into the world of shampoo bottles, where the captivating allure of aromatic compounds and whimsical marketing slogans captivates our attention. While the back labels of these humble vessels fail to yield empirical findings, they do succeed in providing a momentary respite from the rigors of scholarly inquiry.

In conclusion, as we reflect on the whimsical expedition that has unfolded before us, we find ourselves on the cusp of unearthing the peculiar and seemingly preposterous correlation between the first name Dayna and the atmospheric nuances in Milwaukee. With a chorus of chuckles and a sprinkle of scholarly bemusement, we invite you to join us in unraveling the quirky connections that enliven this charming odyssey.


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

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Dayna and Air pollution in Milwaukee. 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 US Social Security Administration and Environmental Protection Agency . You used data from 1980 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]]
A Breath of Fresh Air: The Dayna Dilemma - Exploring the Relationship Between Name Popularity and Air Pollution in Milwaukee

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we embark on a whimsical quest to explore the perplexing correlation between the popularity of the first name Dayna and the levels of air pollution in Milwaukee. Through an unconventional analysis utilizing data from the US Social Security Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency, we unveil surprising insights. Our findings reveal a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.7931498 and p < 0.01 from 1980 to 2022, leading us to ponder whether the trends in air quality may be predictably influenced by the ebb and flow of Daynas in the Milwaukee populace. As we navigate through this lighthearted investigation, we weave together the threads of baby naming trends and atmospheric conditions, delving into the whimsical world of empirical absurdity. Join us on this peculiar journey as we open a window into the curious intersection of human nomenclature and environmental impact.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
Greetings, esteemed colleagues and fellow enthusiasts of the quirky and the curious! In this unprecedented undertaking, we delve deep into the enigmatic nexus of name popularity and atmospheric intricacies. Yes, buckle up, for we are about to embark on a journey through the whimsical corridors of statistical analysis, where the unexpected connections and outrageous correlations await!
Picture this: a buoyant bantam squadron of Daynas, weaving their way through the bustling streets of Milwaukee. Meanwhile, the gentle zephyrs carry an air of intrigue, mingled with a faint whiff of empirical whimsy. It is in this peculiar milieu that the seeds of this endeavor were sown - a lighthearted quest to unravel the seemingly inexplicable link between the eponymous proliferation of Daynas and the ethereal dance of air pollutants.
As we peer through the transparent veil of statistical significance, a rather surprising correlation coefficient of 0.7931498 beckons us forth. While the quintessentially scientific p-value of less than 0.01 calls out from the depths of probability, we find ourselves confronting the extravagance of this tantalizing relationship. With data dating back to the neon-hued decade of 1980 all the way to the digital age of 2022, we have uncovered a pattern that is as confounding as it is captivating.
Now, dear readers, let us not merely skim the cream of empirical absurdity; instead, let us plunge headfirst into the bubbling cauldron of zany hypotheses and whimsical conjectures. And as we wander through this winding maze of name trends and atmospheric conundrums, may we pause to appreciate the comedic undertones that punctuate this scholarly escapade.
Thus, with glee in our hearts and a twinkle in our eyes, we invite you to tag along on this extraordinary odyssey as we endeavor to shed light on the connection between the delightful Dayna and the air we breathe in the city of Milwaukee. So sit back, relax, and fasten your seatbelts, for as we navigate this charming yet puzzling constellation of data, the winds of empirical whimsy are sure to carry us to unforeseen and uproarious vistas!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

Ah, the methodology - the madcap manifesto of our empirical escapade! In this section, we reveal the curious concoction of data collection, statistical sorcery, and analytical antics that propelled us down the labyrinthine path of investigating the link between the ebullient eponym 'Dayna' and the ethereal dance of air pollutants in Milwaukee.

Data Collection:
Our brave band of intrepid researchers scoured the far reaches of the internet in search of the amalgamated archives that would yield the nourishing nectar of a comprehensive dataset. Utilizing the troves of the US Social Security Administration, we delved deep into the annals of baby naming trends from 1980 to 2022, extracting the intriguing instances of the moniker 'Dayna' in the vibrant city of Milwaukee. As for the atmospheric enigma that shrouds Milwaukee, our gallant search led us to the troves of the Environmental Protection Agency's repository, where we harvested the precious pearls of air pollution data, encompassing the ozone level, particulate matter, and other whimsically named pollutants.

Data Analysis:
Our rigorous methodology, a delightful fusion of statistical sorcery and jovial jocularity, relied on the time-honored techniques of correlation analysis. With a twirl of the statistical wand, we conjured the mesmerizing correlation coefficient that dances merrily at 0.7931498, leaving us in a state of blissful bewilderment. The quintessentially scientific p-value, donning its cloak of significance with pride, proudly displays p < 0.01, further adding to the whimsical nature of our quirky quest.

Covariates and Confounding Factors:
In our fanciful endeavor to untangle the Dayna dilemma, we gallantly wrestled with potential confounders and covariates, not unlike masquerading merrymakers at a scholarly soirée. The gallant guardians of causation, lurking amidst the shadows of our analysis, were acknowledged, embraced, and gently nudged aside, ensuring that our correlation was, indeed, a product of astute association and not mere mirthful misinterpretation.

Limitations and Cautions:
Nestled amidst the giddy revelry of our findings, we pause to heed the clarion call of caution. We acknowledge the limitations of our mirthful methods and the merriment-laden nature of our offbeat analysis. While our findings invite a chuckle and a raised eyebrow, we implore our esteemed colleagues to approach this whimsical nexus with the gentle skepticism and good-natured curiosity it so richly deserves.

And there you have it - the zany zest and restless revelry of our peculiar methodology, woven together with a whimsical weave of statistical rigor and jovial jocundity. So, dear readers, as we trudge forward through this realm of empirical absurdity, let us embrace the jubilant journey we've embarked upon and savor the laughter-laden lilt of correlation and causation. Onward, to the radiant horizon of empirical whimsy!


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

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Dayna and Air pollution in Milwaukee. 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 US Social Security Administration and Environmental Protection Agency .

For the time period 1980 to 2022, you found a correlation 0.7931498, r-squared of 0.6290866, 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]]
A Breath of Fresh Air: The Dayna Dilemma - Exploring the Relationship Between Name Popularity and Air Pollution in Milwaukee

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we embark on a whimsical quest to explore the perplexing correlation between the popularity of the first name Dayna and the levels of air pollution in Milwaukee. Through an unconventional analysis utilizing data from the US Social Security Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency, we unveil surprising insights. Our findings reveal a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.7931498 and p < 0.01 from 1980 to 2022, leading us to ponder whether the trends in air quality may be predictably influenced by the ebb and flow of Daynas in the Milwaukee populace. As we navigate through this lighthearted investigation, we weave together the threads of baby naming trends and atmospheric conditions, delving into the whimsical world of empirical absurdity. Join us on this peculiar journey as we open a window into the curious intersection of human nomenclature and environmental impact.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
Greetings, esteemed colleagues and fellow enthusiasts of the quirky and the curious! In this unprecedented undertaking, we delve deep into the enigmatic nexus of name popularity and atmospheric intricacies. Yes, buckle up, for we are about to embark on a journey through the whimsical corridors of statistical analysis, where the unexpected connections and outrageous correlations await!
Picture this: a buoyant bantam squadron of Daynas, weaving their way through the bustling streets of Milwaukee. Meanwhile, the gentle zephyrs carry an air of intrigue, mingled with a faint whiff of empirical whimsy. It is in this peculiar milieu that the seeds of this endeavor were sown - a lighthearted quest to unravel the seemingly inexplicable link between the eponymous proliferation of Daynas and the ethereal dance of air pollutants.
As we peer through the transparent veil of statistical significance, a rather surprising correlation coefficient of 0.7931498 beckons us forth. While the quintessentially scientific p-value of less than 0.01 calls out from the depths of probability, we find ourselves confronting the extravagance of this tantalizing relationship. With data dating back to the neon-hued decade of 1980 all the way to the digital age of 2022, we have uncovered a pattern that is as confounding as it is captivating.
Now, dear readers, let us not merely skim the cream of empirical absurdity; instead, let us plunge headfirst into the bubbling cauldron of zany hypotheses and whimsical conjectures. And as we wander through this winding maze of name trends and atmospheric conundrums, may we pause to appreciate the comedic undertones that punctuate this scholarly escapade.
Thus, with glee in our hearts and a twinkle in our eyes, we invite you to tag along on this extraordinary odyssey as we endeavor to shed light on the connection between the delightful Dayna and the air we breathe in the city of Milwaukee. So sit back, relax, and fasten your seatbelts, for as we navigate this charming yet puzzling constellation of data, the winds of empirical whimsy are sure to carry us to unforeseen and uproarious vistas!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

Our offbeat exploration into the enigmatic correlation between the popularity of the first name Dayna and air pollution levels in Milwaukee has unearthed some delightfully absurd findings. Drumroll, please! The correlation coefficient of 0.7931498 extended its hand to meet us, while the r-squared of 0.6290866 let out a mischievous wink, signaling that there's more to this whimsical union than meets the eye. And for the grand finale, the ever-dramatic p-value of less than 0.01 made a striking entrance, leaving us in suspense as we pondered the surreptitious dance of Daynas and airborne particles.

As anticipated, our trusty scatterplot (Fig. 1) takes center stage, showcasing the unmistakably strong relationship between the prevalence of the name Dayna and the delicate dance of air pollutants in Milwaukee. Each data point seems to exude its own peculiar charm, almost as if the statistical muses themselves had dipped their brushes in a palette of empirical absurdity before painting this whimsical masterpiece.

With a flourish of statistical prowess and a sprinkle of scientific tomfoolery, we found ourselves at the heart of an improbable saga, where the ebb and flow of Daynas seemed inexorably entwined with the atmospheric whims of Milwaukee. Could it be that the mere presence of Daynas in this urban landscape has been the silent orchestrator of this airborne ballet, steering the winds of fate in the most capricious of ways?

In closing, our journey through this unconventional intersection of human nomenclature and atmospheric caprice has left us intrigued, amused, and bewitched in equal measure. Join us in celebrating this delightful voyage into the absurd, where the scientific and the whimsical collide in a symphony of statistical splendor. Let the confetti of correlation and the balloons of significance fill the air as we raise a toast to the Dayna dilemma - an enigma that has left us breathless, both literally and figuratively. Cheers to the Daynas and the air, for they have spun a tale as enchanting as it is inexplicable!


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

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Dayna and Air pollution in Milwaukee. 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]]
A Breath of Fresh Air: The Dayna Dilemma - Exploring the Relationship Between Name Popularity and Air Pollution in Milwaukee

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we embark on a whimsical quest to explore the perplexing correlation between the popularity of the first name Dayna and the levels of air pollution in Milwaukee. Through an unconventional analysis utilizing data from the US Social Security Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency, we unveil surprising insights. Our findings reveal a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.7931498 and p < 0.01 from 1980 to 2022, leading us to ponder whether the trends in air quality may be predictably influenced by the ebb and flow of Daynas in the Milwaukee populace. As we navigate through this lighthearted investigation, we weave together the threads of baby naming trends and atmospheric conditions, delving into the whimsical world of empirical absurdity. Join us on this peculiar journey as we open a window into the curious intersection of human nomenclature and environmental impact.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
Much like an intrepid explorer venturing into uncharted territory, we set out to brave the convoluted terrain of literature surrounding the interplay of name popularity and environmental factors. Our journey begins with a solemn nod to the esteemed works of Smith, Doe, and Jones, who, in their hallmark studies "Names and Numbers" and "Cityscape Chronicles," laid the groundwork for understanding the enigmatic dynamics of nomenclature and urban atmospheres. Building upon their scholarly endeavors, we dive into the depths of quirky correlations and whimsical revelations.
As we navigate through this ethereal labyrinth of inquiry, we encounter the works of environmental activists and urban planners, shedding light on the complexities of air pollution in metropolitan areas. "Breathless in the City" by CleanAir Crusaders offers a poignant narrative of the struggle for cleaner air, albeit without a single mention of Dayna or its impact on air quality. Nevertheless, we press on, turning our attention to the sphere of baby naming trends with "The Name Game" by Pop Culture Prodigy, which illuminates the zeitgeist of moniker preferences but, regrettably, lacks any reference to atmospheric influences.
From the realm of non-fiction, we venture into the world of fiction, where the works of authors such as John Green and J.K. Rowling beckon to us with their tantalizing storylines. Could it be that hidden within the pages of "The Fault in Our Stars" or "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets" lies the key to unraveling the peculiar connection between Dayna and air pollution? Alas, while the literary escapades provide enchanting diversion, they offer little insight into our curious conundrum.
Undeterred by the limitations of conventional research sources, we dare to seek knowledge in the most unexpected of places. Yes, dear reader, we confess that in our pursuit of enlightenment, we have delved into the world of shampoo bottles, where the captivating allure of aromatic compounds and whimsical marketing slogans captivates our attention. While the back labels of these humble vessels fail to yield empirical findings, they do succeed in providing a momentary respite from the rigors of scholarly inquiry.
In conclusion, as we reflect on the whimsical expedition that has unfolded before us, we find ourselves on the cusp of unearthing the peculiar and seemingly preposterous correlation between the first name Dayna and the atmospheric nuances in Milwaukee. With a chorus of chuckles and a sprinkle of scholarly bemusement, we invite you to join us in unraveling the quirky connections that enliven this charming odyssey.

[[RESULTS]]
Our offbeat exploration into the enigmatic correlation between the popularity of the first name Dayna and air pollution levels in Milwaukee has unearthed some delightfully absurd findings. Drumroll, please! The correlation coefficient of 0.7931498 extended its hand to meet us, while the r-squared of 0.6290866 let out a mischievous wink, signaling that there's more to this whimsical union than meets the eye. And for the grand finale, the ever-dramatic p-value of less than 0.01 made a striking entrance, leaving us in suspense as we pondered the surreptitious dance of Daynas and airborne particles.
As anticipated, our trusty scatterplot (Fig. 1) takes center stage, showcasing the unmistakably strong relationship between the prevalence of the name Dayna and the delicate dance of air pollutants in Milwaukee. Each data point seems to exude its own peculiar charm, almost as if the statistical muses themselves had dipped their brushes in a palette of empirical absurdity before painting this whimsical masterpiece.
With a flourish of statistical prowess and a sprinkle of scientific tomfoolery, we found ourselves at the heart of an improbable saga, where the ebb and flow of Daynas seemed inexorably entwined with the atmospheric whims of Milwaukee. Could it be that the mere presence of Daynas in this urban landscape has been the silent orchestrator of this airborne ballet, steering the winds of fate in the most capricious of ways?
In closing, our journey through this unconventional intersection of human nomenclature and atmospheric caprice has left us intrigued, amused, and bewitched in equal measure. Join us in celebrating this delightful voyage into the absurd, where the scientific and the whimsical collide in a symphony of statistical splendor. Let the confetti of correlation and the balloons of significance fill the air as we raise a toast to the Dayna dilemma - an enigma that has left us breathless, both literally and figuratively. Cheers to the Daynas and the air, for they have spun a tale as enchanting as it is inexplicable!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

In the elaborate tapestry of scientific inquiry, the whimsical correlation we have uncovered between the popularity of the first name Dayna and air pollution levels in Milwaukee prances onto the stage like a troupe of uninvited jesters. Although our initial foray into this peculiar intersection may have raised an eyebrow or two, our findings have deftly pirouetted alongside the established literature, adding a touch of carnival-esque flair to the scholarly ballroom.

With one foot firmly planted in the realm of empirical absurdity, our results have performed a merry jig in concert with the earlier work of Smith, Doe, and Jones, whose solemn treatises "Names and Numbers" and "Cityscape Chronicles" offered a tantalizing glimpse into the enigmatic dynamics of nomenclature and urban atmospheres. It is with a measure of delight – and perhaps the faintest hint of incredulity – that we declare our findings to be in harmonious accord with the quirkiness that pervaded these seminal pieces.

As we segue from the realm of statistical whimsy into the rollicking world of baby naming trends and atmospheric caprice, our journey has intersected with an assortment of scholarly oddities that seemed tailor-made for our curious conundrum. Through some daring feats of interpretative creativity, we reconciled our results with the sincere – albeit Dayna-deprived – narrative of "Breathless in the City" by CleanAir Crusaders and the charming, yet unenlightened, "The Name Game" by Pop Culture Prodigy.

In a surprising turn of events, our cheeky statistical measures – the correlation coefficient, the r-squared, and the mischievous p-value – have taken center stage, regaling us with a tale of undeniable resonance between the ebb and flow of Daynas and the ethereal dance of air pollutants in Milwaukee. Our trusty scatterplot (Fig. 1) stands as a pièce de résistance, a vivacious tableau vivant that captures the essence of this zany coupling with a whimsical allure that defies conventional explanation.

The bewitching saga of the Dayna dilemma has left us spinning in the whimsical eddies of empirical revelation, prompting us to reflect on the enchanting interplay of statistical irreverence and scientific incredulity. Our results stand as a testament to the delightful fusion of the bizarre and the scholarly, reminding us that the pursuit of knowledge need not always be devoid of mirth and merriment.

Stay tuned for more to come in the conclusion...


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

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Dayna and Air pollution in Milwaukee. 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]]
A Breath of Fresh Air: The Dayna Dilemma - Exploring the Relationship Between Name Popularity and Air Pollution in Milwaukee

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we embark on a whimsical quest to explore the perplexing correlation between the popularity of the first name Dayna and the levels of air pollution in Milwaukee. Through an unconventional analysis utilizing data from the US Social Security Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency, we unveil surprising insights. Our findings reveal a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.7931498 and p < 0.01 from 1980 to 2022, leading us to ponder whether the trends in air quality may be predictably influenced by the ebb and flow of Daynas in the Milwaukee populace. As we navigate through this lighthearted investigation, we weave together the threads of baby naming trends and atmospheric conditions, delving into the whimsical world of empirical absurdity. Join us on this peculiar journey as we open a window into the curious intersection of human nomenclature and environmental impact.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
Greetings, esteemed colleagues and fellow enthusiasts of the quirky and the curious! In this unprecedented undertaking, we delve deep into the enigmatic nexus of name popularity and atmospheric intricacies. Yes, buckle up, for we are about to embark on a journey through the whimsical corridors of statistical analysis, where the unexpected connections and outrageous correlations await!
Picture this: a buoyant bantam squadron of Daynas, weaving their way through the bustling streets of Milwaukee. Meanwhile, the gentle zephyrs carry an air of intrigue, mingled with a faint whiff of empirical whimsy. It is in this peculiar milieu that the seeds of this endeavor were sown - a lighthearted quest to unravel the seemingly inexplicable link between the eponymous proliferation of Daynas and the ethereal dance of air pollutants.
As we peer through the transparent veil of statistical significance, a rather surprising correlation coefficient of 0.7931498 beckons us forth. While the quintessentially scientific p-value of less than 0.01 calls out from the depths of probability, we find ourselves confronting the extravagance of this tantalizing relationship. With data dating back to the neon-hued decade of 1980 all the way to the digital age of 2022, we have uncovered a pattern that is as confounding as it is captivating.
Now, dear readers, let us not merely skim the cream of empirical absurdity; instead, let us plunge headfirst into the bubbling cauldron of zany hypotheses and whimsical conjectures. And as we wander through this winding maze of name trends and atmospheric conundrums, may we pause to appreciate the comedic undertones that punctuate this scholarly escapade.
Thus, with glee in our hearts and a twinkle in our eyes, we invite you to tag along on this extraordinary odyssey as we endeavor to shed light on the connection between the delightful Dayna and the air we breathe in the city of Milwaukee. So sit back, relax, and fasten your seatbelts, for as we navigate this charming yet puzzling constellation of data, the winds of empirical whimsy are sure to carry us to unforeseen and uproarious vistas!

[[RESULTS]]
Our offbeat exploration into the enigmatic correlation between the popularity of the first name Dayna and air pollution levels in Milwaukee has unearthed some delightfully absurd findings. Drumroll, please! The correlation coefficient of 0.7931498 extended its hand to meet us, while the r-squared of 0.6290866 let out a mischievous wink, signaling that there's more to this whimsical union than meets the eye. And for the grand finale, the ever-dramatic p-value of less than 0.01 made a striking entrance, leaving us in suspense as we pondered the surreptitious dance of Daynas and airborne particles.
As anticipated, our trusty scatterplot (Fig. 1) takes center stage, showcasing the unmistakably strong relationship between the prevalence of the name Dayna and the delicate dance of air pollutants in Milwaukee. Each data point seems to exude its own peculiar charm, almost as if the statistical muses themselves had dipped their brushes in a palette of empirical absurdity before painting this whimsical masterpiece.
With a flourish of statistical prowess and a sprinkle of scientific tomfoolery, we found ourselves at the heart of an improbable saga, where the ebb and flow of Daynas seemed inexorably entwined with the atmospheric whims of Milwaukee. Could it be that the mere presence of Daynas in this urban landscape has been the silent orchestrator of this airborne ballet, steering the winds of fate in the most capricious of ways?
In closing, our journey through this unconventional intersection of human nomenclature and atmospheric caprice has left us intrigued, amused, and bewitched in equal measure. Join us in celebrating this delightful voyage into the absurd, where the scientific and the whimsical collide in a symphony of statistical splendor. Let the confetti of correlation and the balloons of significance fill the air as we raise a toast to the Dayna dilemma - an enigma that has left us breathless, both literally and figuratively. Cheers to the Daynas and the air, for they have spun a tale as enchanting as it is inexplicable!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

As we conclude this rollicking romp through the tangled underbrush of name popularity and atmospheric antics, we find ourselves enchanted by the whimsical waltz of the Daynas and the airy particles in the windswept city of Milwaukee. Our foray into this uncanny correlation has certainly given us much fodder for jubilant japes and statistical shenanigans.

The striking correlation coefficient of 0.7931498 and the r-squared of 0.6290866 have left our scientific sensibilities tickled pink, as we pondered the enigmatic influence of Daynas on the atmospheric theatrics. It's as if the statistical sprites themselves were gleefully cavorting through the data, leading us down a merry path of empirical absurdity.

Now, as we bid adieu to this comical rendezvous, we must acknowledge that this curious correlation has unfurled its comedic charm, leaving us chuckling in its wake. And as we raise our glass flasks to the Dayna dilemma, we assert with utmost confidence that no more research is needed in this delightful, yet confounding realm of inquiry. After all, when it comes to unraveling the caprices of Daynas and air pollution, we may have already reached the pinnacle of empirical whimsy. With a wink and a nod to the statistical muses, we bid you farewell from this madcap expedition, armed with a newfound appreciation for the unexpected joy that can be found in the most unlikely of relationships.

It’s time to let the Daynas dance and the air particles play, for in the realm of empirical absurdity, laughter is the best statistical medicine!


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 A Breath of Fresh Air: The Dayna Dilemma - Exploring the Relationship Between Name Popularity and Air Pollution in Milwaukee. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Ecological Trends and Nameology


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 A Breath of Fresh Air: The Dayna Dilemma - Exploring the Relationship Between Name Popularity and Air Pollution in Milwaukee. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for Environmental Research and Nameology


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 A Breath of Fresh Air: The Dayna Dilemma - Exploring the Relationship Between Name Popularity and Air Pollution in Milwaukee with an abstract of In this study, we embark on a whimsical quest to explore the perplexing correlation between the popularity of the first name Dayna and the levels of air pollution in Milwaukee. Through an unconventional analysis utilizing data from the US Social Security Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency, we unveil surprising insights. Our findings reveal a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.7931498 and p < 0.01 from 1980 to 2022, leading us to ponder whether the trends in air quality may be predictably influenced by the ebb and flow of Daynas in the Milwaukee populace. As we navigate through this lighthearted investigation, we weave together the threads of baby naming trends and atmospheric conditions, delving into the whimsical world of empirical absurdity. Join us on this peculiar journey as we open a window into the curious intersection of human nomenclature and environmental impact.

ChatGPT:

Dayna, name popularity, air pollution, Milwaukee, correlation, US Social Security Administration, Environmental Protection Agency, correlation coefficient, statistical significance, baby naming trends, atmospheric conditions, empirical absurdity, human nomenclature, environmental impact

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



Random correlation

Discover a new correlation

View all correlations

View all research papers

Report an error


Data details

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

Air pollution in Milwaukee
Detailed data title: Percentage of days with air quality at 'unhealthy for sensitive groups' or worse in Milwaukee-Waukesha-West Allis, WI
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
See what else correlates with Air pollution in Milwaukee

Correlation r = 0.7931498 (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 = 0.6290866 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 62.9% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Air pollution in Milwaukee) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Popularity of the first name Dayna) over the 43 years from 1980 through 2022.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 2.3E-10. 0.0000000002279597162309522000
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 0.79 in 2.3E-8% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 4,386,739,976 random variables You don't actually need 4 billion variables to find a correlation like this one. I don't have that many variables in my database. You can also correlate variables that are not independent. I do this a lot.

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

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

Just to be clear: I'm being completely transparent about the calculations. There is no math trickery. This is just how statistics shakes out when you calculate hundreds of millions of random correlations.
with the same 42 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 42 because we have two variables measured over a period of 43 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.

[ 0.65, 0.88 ] 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.
1980198119821983198419851986198719881989199019911992199319941995199619971998199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022
Popularity of the first name Dayna (Babies born)3403313562943213412603683613483513332782592662722242501982202201972001881741691471391249581736956574447385337402925
Air pollution in Milwaukee (Bad air quality days)10.382510.893910.13713.77419.289629.863018.4931512.602717.486312.32887.6712313.97266.010934.383566.301379.04114.644815.205488.4931513.15074.6448110.41110.1377.945214.3715811.23293.287676.02741.639342.739733.835623.01378.743171.095892.465751.369862.459022.191782.465750.8219181.912573.287671.64384




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([340,331,356,294,321,341,260,368,361,348,351,333,278,259,266,272,224,250,198,220,220,197,200,188,174,169,147,139,124,95,81,73,69,56,57,44,47,38,53,37,40,29,25,])
array_2 = np.array([10.3825,10.8939,10.137,13.7741,9.28962,9.86301,8.49315,12.6027,17.4863,12.3288,7.67123,13.9726,6.01093,4.38356,6.30137,9.0411,4.64481,5.20548,8.49315,13.1507,4.64481,10.411,10.137,7.94521,4.37158,11.2329,3.28767,6.0274,1.63934,2.73973,3.83562,3.0137,8.74317,1.09589,2.46575,1.36986,2.45902,2.19178,2.46575,0.821918,1.91257,3.28767,1.64384,])
array_1_name = "Popularity of the first name Dayna"
array_2_name = "Air pollution in Milwaukee"

# 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 rating skills are top-notch!


Correlation ID: 3852 · Black Variable ID: 3542 · Red Variable ID: 20901
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0