Download png, svg
AI explanation
As the woodchucks realized the futility of their chucking efforts, they shifted their focus to alternative energy sources, leading to a surplus of kerosene in Venezuela. One-liner: It's a case of supply and demand being influenced by woodchuck contemplation!
Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Create an image of a pop art style scene featuring people in their backyards, frantically searching on their phones for "how much wood can a woodchuck chuck" as they prepare to compete in lumberjack contests. Meanwhile, show kerosene production facilities in Venezuela struggling to keep up with the sudden demand for wood, causing disruptions in the supply chain. Wood piles are dwindling, and the distribution of kerosene is impacted as a result. Use bold, contrasting colors and geometric patterns to depict the urgency and chaos of the situation, while keeping the visual depiction simple and impactful. 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: Google searches for 'how much wood can a woodchuck chuck' and Kerosene used in Venezuela. 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: Realistic 3D Pixar Style A photo-realistic image Pop art Voxel art
ChatGPT: Pop 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 Google searches for 'how much wood can a woodchuck chuck' and Kerosene used in Venezuela, in the following situation: The increased curiosity about woodchuck wood-chucking abilities led to a surge in backyard lumberjack competitions, resulting in a shortage of available wood for kerosene production in Venezuela. This unexpected demand for wood caused a supply chain disruption, ultimately affecting the production and distribution of kerosene in the country.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In the scene, we see people gathered in their backyards, eagerly searching on their phones for "how much wood can a woodchuck chuck," as they prepare to compete in lumberjack contests. Meanwhile, in Venezuela, we see kerosene production facilities struggling to keep up with the sudden demand for wood, causing disruptions in the supply chain. Wood piles are dwindling, and the distribution of kerosene is impacted as a result.
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: [ Pop art ] and depicting this scene: In the scene, we see people gathered in their backyards, eagerly searching on their phones for "how much wood can a woodchuck chuck," as they prepare to compete in lumberjack contests. Meanwhile, in Venezuela, we see kerosene production facilities struggling to keep up with the sudden demand for wood, causing disruptions in the supply chain. Wood piles are dwindling, and the distribution of kerosene is impacted as a result. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Create an image of a pop art style scene featuring people in their backyards, frantically searching on their phones for "how much wood can a woodchuck chuck" as they prepare to compete in lumberjack contests. Meanwhile, show kerosene production facilities in Venezuela struggling to keep up with the sudden demand for wood, causing disruptions in the supply chain. Wood piles are dwindling, and the distribution of kerosene is impacted as a result. Use bold, contrasting colors and geometric patterns to depict the urgency and chaos of the situation, while keeping the visual depiction simple and impactful.
*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.
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 how much wood can a woodchuck chuck (Google searches for 'how much wood can a woodchuck chuck') caused Kerosene used in Venezuela to decrease. Add a funny one-liner at the end.
AI academic paper
 |
How Much Kerosene for a Woodchuck Spleen: The Correlation Between Google Searches for 'How Much Wood Can a Woodchuck Chuck' and Kerosene Usage in Venezuela The Journal of Irreverent Eclectic Studies Jan 2024 Reminder: This paper is AI-generated. Not real! |
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a 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 Google searches for 'how much wood can a woodchuck chuck' and Kerosene used in Venezuela. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.
Rhyme words in the title.
Your research team used data from Google Trends and Energy Information Administration to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.8937157 and p < 0.01 for 2004 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]]
"How Much Kerosene for a Woodchuck Spleen: The Correlation Between Google Searches for 'How Much Wood Can a Woodchuck Chuck' and Kerosene Usage in Venezuela"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This study investigates the curious connection between two seemingly disparate entities: the often pondered question of a woodchuck's wood-chucking capacity and the utilization of kerosene in the South American nation of Venezuela. Utilizing data from Google Trends and the Energy Information Administration, our research team uncovered a surprisingly robust correlation between the frequency of Google searches for "how much wood can a woodchuck chuck" and the amount of kerosene consumed in Venezuela from 2004 to 2021. With a correlation coefficient of 0.8937157 and p < 0.01, the findings indicate a noteworthy association that defies conventional expectations. This investigation not only sheds light on the whimsical and unexpected intersections within seemingly unrelated subject matters but also adds a touch of levity to the typically serious field of scholarly inquiry. The implications of these findings spark contemplation on the lively interplay of seemingly disconnected phenomena and offer an amusing divergence from the traditional research landscape.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a 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 Google searches for 'how much wood can a woodchuck chuck' and Kerosene used in Venezuela. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.
Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"How Much Kerosene for a Woodchuck Spleen: The Correlation Between Google Searches for 'How Much Wood Can a Woodchuck Chuck' and Kerosene Usage in Venezuela"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This study investigates the curious connection between two seemingly disparate entities: the often pondered question of a woodchuck's wood-chucking capacity and the utilization of kerosene in the South American nation of Venezuela. Utilizing data from Google Trends and the Energy Information Administration, our research team uncovered a surprisingly robust correlation between the frequency of Google searches for "how much wood can a woodchuck chuck" and the amount of kerosene consumed in Venezuela from 2004 to 2021. With a correlation coefficient of 0.8937157 and p < 0.01, the findings indicate a noteworthy association that defies conventional expectations. This investigation not only sheds light on the whimsical and unexpected intersections within seemingly unrelated subject matters but also adds a touch of levity to the typically serious field of scholarly inquiry. The implications of these findings spark contemplation on the lively interplay of seemingly disconnected phenomena and offer an amusing divergence from the traditional research landscape.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
In the realm of academic inquiry, serendipitous discoveries often emerge from the most unexpected quarters. The intersection of seemingly incongruous subjects has yielded a pantheon of scholarly insights, from the fortuitous discovery of penicillin to the unearthing of the Higgs boson. The present study embarks on a similarly whimsical journey, venturing into the unlikely link between the obscure musings of a woodchuck's arboreal prowess and the pressing energy needs of a nation in South America.
The inquiry commences with the perennial, albeit nonsensical, question that has long titillated the human psyche – "how much wood can a woodchuck chuck?" This enigmatized query, an allegorical emblem of intellectual contemplation, has transcended generations, perpetually puzzling philosophers and laypersons alike. A Google Trends analysis of the search frequency for this conundrum reveals intriguing patterns, guiding us through the labyrinth of internet queries to an unexpected destination – the kerosene consumption landscape in Venezuela.
In juxtaposing the seemingly trivial pursuit of woodchuck-related inquiries with the sobering energy consumption data of a nation, we are propelled into a realm of delightful curiosity and exhilarating disbelief. The correlation unveiled through rigorous statistical analysis prompts a reevaluation of the age-old adage "as useless as a woodchuck on kerosene day." The juxtaposition of these two disparate domains sets the stage for a whimsical narrative, inviting readers to join us in an exploratory journey through the unexpected corridors of scholarly inquiry.
As we embark on this investigative odyssey, we invite the scholarly community to partake in the revelry and intellectual frivolity of our findings. The amalgamation of analytical rigor and serendipitous discovery paints a peculiar portrait of the interconnectedness of our world, where the seemingly preposterous finds communion with the ostensibly consequential. In the spirit of academic merriment, we implore our readers to approach our inquiry with a discerning eye, for, as Lewis Carroll once observed, "What is the use of a book without pictures or conversations?" Welcome to the whimsically woven tapestry of "How Much Kerosene for a Woodchuck Spleen: The Correlation Between Google Searches for 'How Much Wood Can a Woodchuck Chuck' and Kerosene Usage in Venezuela."
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a 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 Google searches for 'how much wood can a woodchuck chuck' and Kerosene used in Venezuela. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.
Speak in the present tense for this section (the authors find...), as is common in academic research paper literature reviews. Name the sources in a format similar to this: In "Book," the authors find lorem and ipsum.
Make up the lorem and ipsum part, but make it sound related to the topic at hand.
Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then name a couple popular internet memes that are related to one of the topics.
Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"How Much Kerosene for a Woodchuck Spleen: The Correlation Between Google Searches for 'How Much Wood Can a Woodchuck Chuck' and Kerosene Usage in Venezuela"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This study investigates the curious connection between two seemingly disparate entities: the often pondered question of a woodchuck's wood-chucking capacity and the utilization of kerosene in the South American nation of Venezuela. Utilizing data from Google Trends and the Energy Information Administration, our research team uncovered a surprisingly robust correlation between the frequency of Google searches for "how much wood can a woodchuck chuck" and the amount of kerosene consumed in Venezuela from 2004 to 2021. With a correlation coefficient of 0.8937157 and p < 0.01, the findings indicate a noteworthy association that defies conventional expectations. This investigation not only sheds light on the whimsical and unexpected intersections within seemingly unrelated subject matters but also adds a touch of levity to the typically serious field of scholarly inquiry. The implications of these findings spark contemplation on the lively interplay of seemingly disconnected phenomena and offer an amusing divergence from the traditional research landscape.
-------
And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
In the realm of academic inquiry, serendipitous discoveries often emerge from the most unexpected quarters. The intersection of seemingly incongruous subjects has yielded a pantheon of scholarly insights, from the fortuitous discovery of penicillin to the unearthing of the Higgs boson. The present study embarks on a similarly whimsical journey, venturing into the unlikely link between the obscure musings of a woodchuck's arboreal prowess and the pressing energy needs of a nation in South America.
The inquiry commences with the perennial, albeit nonsensical, question that has long titillated the human psyche – "how much wood can a woodchuck chuck?" This enigmatized query, an allegorical emblem of intellectual contemplation, has transcended generations, perpetually puzzling philosophers and laypersons alike. A Google Trends analysis of the search frequency for this conundrum reveals intriguing patterns, guiding us through the labyrinth of internet queries to an unexpected destination – the kerosene consumption landscape in Venezuela.
In juxtaposing the seemingly trivial pursuit of woodchuck-related inquiries with the sobering energy consumption data of a nation, we are propelled into a realm of delightful curiosity and exhilarating disbelief. The correlation unveiled through rigorous statistical analysis prompts a reevaluation of the age-old adage "as useless as a woodchuck on kerosene day." The juxtaposition of these two disparate domains sets the stage for a whimsical narrative, inviting readers to join us in an exploratory journey through the unexpected corridors of scholarly inquiry.
As we embark on this investigative odyssey, we invite the scholarly community to partake in the revelry and intellectual frivolity of our findings. The amalgamation of analytical rigor and serendipitous discovery paints a peculiar portrait of the interconnectedness of our world, where the seemingly preposterous finds communion with the ostensibly consequential. In the spirit of academic merriment, we implore our readers to approach our inquiry with a discerning eye, for, as Lewis Carroll once observed, "What is the use of a book without pictures or conversations?" Welcome to the whimsically woven tapestry of "How Much Kerosene for a Woodchuck Spleen: The Correlation Between Google Searches for 'How Much Wood Can a Woodchuck Chuck' and Kerosene Usage in Venezuela."
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The obscure and enigmatic correlation between Google searches for "how much wood can a woodchuck chuck" and kerosene consumption in Venezuela has perplexed researchers for decades. Early explorations by Smith and Doe (2008) hinted at a potential connection, albeit in a manner that was somewhat obscured by the gravitational pull of traditional scholarly inquiry. Jones et al. (2012) similarly delved into the intricate web of woodchuck-related ponderings, laying the groundwork for a paradigm shift in the scholarly exploration of seemingly unrelated subject matters.
Venturing into the labyrinth of literature, in "The Woodchuck Chronicles: A Comprehensive Study of Rodent Arboreal Aptitude," the authors provide a thorough analysis of the woodchuck's capacity for chucking wood, ultimately reframing the quintessential inquiry as a metaphor for humanity's unyielding pursuit of knowledge. Parallel to this, "Kerosene: A Combustible Commodity" by Brown and Johnson offers an extensive overview of kerosene usage and its implications in various societal contexts, gesturing towards the complex interplay of energy dynamics on a global scale.
The works of fiction, such as Gabriel Garcia Marquez's "One Hundred Years of Solitude" and Isabel Allende's "The House of the Spirits," serve as literary testaments to the vibrant and tumultuous tapestry of Venezuelan history, providing contextual undercurrents to the underlying narrative of kerosene consumption within the nation. The unrestrained imaginings of these authors mirror the capricious nature of our investigative pursuits, intertwining the fervor of intellectual inquiry with the whimsy of literary expression.
Furthermore, the internet meme featuring the woodchuck and its proclivity for wood-chucking, often accompanied by an exuberant exclamation of "Chuck Norris!" in homage to the legendary martial artist, carves a light-hearted niche within the digital sphere, marking a resonance with the seemingly incongruous nature of our research interests. This convergence of pop culture and academic intrigue epitomizes the delightful whimsy that permeates our scholarly exegesis, inviting readers to confront the unanticipated with an indulgent chuckle.
The fusion of seemingly unrelated subject matters in this investigation stands as a symphonic ode to the animated interplay of scholarly whimsy and rigorous inquiry. As we untangle the seemingly ludicrous bonds that tether the woodchuck's enigma to the kerosene consumption landscape in Venezuela, we beckon the scholarly community to revel in the wonderment of this unconventional convergence. For, in the words of the inimitable Mark Twain, "The secret of getting ahead is getting started. The secret of getting started is breaking your complex overwhelming tasks into small manageable tasks, and then starting on the first one – chucking wood or otherwise."
This whimsical expedition into the interstices of academic scholarship serves as a buoyant reminder of the unparalleled vitality of scholarly inquiry, intermingling the incongruous with the insightful in a dance of erudition and mirth.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a 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 Google searches for 'how much wood can a woodchuck chuck' and Kerosene used in Venezuela. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.
Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Google Trends and Energy Information Administration . You used data from 2004 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]]
"How Much Kerosene for a Woodchuck Spleen: The Correlation Between Google Searches for 'How Much Wood Can a Woodchuck Chuck' and Kerosene Usage in Venezuela"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This study investigates the curious connection between two seemingly disparate entities: the often pondered question of a woodchuck's wood-chucking capacity and the utilization of kerosene in the South American nation of Venezuela. Utilizing data from Google Trends and the Energy Information Administration, our research team uncovered a surprisingly robust correlation between the frequency of Google searches for "how much wood can a woodchuck chuck" and the amount of kerosene consumed in Venezuela from 2004 to 2021. With a correlation coefficient of 0.8937157 and p < 0.01, the findings indicate a noteworthy association that defies conventional expectations. This investigation not only sheds light on the whimsical and unexpected intersections within seemingly unrelated subject matters but also adds a touch of levity to the typically serious field of scholarly inquiry. The implications of these findings spark contemplation on the lively interplay of seemingly disconnected phenomena and offer an amusing divergence from the traditional research landscape.
[[INTRODUCTION]]
In the realm of academic inquiry, serendipitous discoveries often emerge from the most unexpected quarters. The intersection of seemingly incongruous subjects has yielded a pantheon of scholarly insights, from the fortuitous discovery of penicillin to the unearthing of the Higgs boson. The present study embarks on a similarly whimsical journey, venturing into the unlikely link between the obscure musings of a woodchuck's arboreal prowess and the pressing energy needs of a nation in South America.
The inquiry commences with the perennial, albeit nonsensical, question that has long titillated the human psyche – "how much wood can a woodchuck chuck?" This enigmatized query, an allegorical emblem of intellectual contemplation, has transcended generations, perpetually puzzling philosophers and laypersons alike. A Google Trends analysis of the search frequency for this conundrum reveals intriguing patterns, guiding us through the labyrinth of internet queries to an unexpected destination – the kerosene consumption landscape in Venezuela.
In juxtaposing the seemingly trivial pursuit of woodchuck-related inquiries with the sobering energy consumption data of a nation, we are propelled into a realm of delightful curiosity and exhilarating disbelief. The correlation unveiled through rigorous statistical analysis prompts a reevaluation of the age-old adage "as useless as a woodchuck on kerosene day." The juxtaposition of these two disparate domains sets the stage for a whimsical narrative, inviting readers to join us in an exploratory journey through the unexpected corridors of scholarly inquiry.
As we embark on this investigative odyssey, we invite the scholarly community to partake in the revelry and intellectual frivolity of our findings. The amalgamation of analytical rigor and serendipitous discovery paints a peculiar portrait of the interconnectedness of our world, where the seemingly preposterous finds communion with the ostensibly consequential. In the spirit of academic merriment, we implore our readers to approach our inquiry with a discerning eye, for, as Lewis Carroll once observed, "What is the use of a book without pictures or conversations?" Welcome to the whimsically woven tapestry of "How Much Kerosene for a Woodchuck Spleen: The Correlation Between Google Searches for 'How Much Wood Can a Woodchuck Chuck' and Kerosene Usage in Venezuela."
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
ChatGPT:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
In order to unravel the enigmatic connection between the puzzling inquiry into a woodchuck's arboreal inclinations and the consumption of kerosene in Venezuela, a methodological framework was meticulously crafted to navigate the labyrinthine corridors of internet data and energy consumption statistics. Our research team employed a combination of quantitative analysis and dives into the depths of internet curiosity to illuminate this whimsical correlation.
First and foremost, data pertaining to the frequency of searches for "how much wood can a woodchuck chuck" on the Google search engine was procured from Google Trends. This collection process involved sifting through an extensive plethora of search queries to isolate the poignant musings on woodchuck wood-chucking prowess from the myriad of Internet inquiries. This data was then meticulously parsed, organized, and subjected to rigorous statistical analysis.
Simultaneously, the perceptive gaze of our research team was cast towards the energy consumption landscape of Venezuela. Data elucidating the utilization of kerosene in the country was acquired from the Energy Information Administration, providing a comprehensive portrait of the nation's kerosene consumption from 2004 to 2021. The juxtaposition of these two disparate realms was guided by the scholastic rigor necessary to navigate the crisscrossing paths of internet trivia and energy statistics.
Next, the convergence of these divergent datasets formed the locus of our analytical pursuit. Employing robust statistical methodologies, including Pearson correlation coefficients and regression analyses, the research team embarked on an odyssey to uncover the underlying resonance between the frequency of woodchuck-related searches and Venezuela's kerosene utilization. The confluence of these distinct datasets paved the way for the unveiling of an unexpected and inexplicable correlation that has long eluded scholarly contemplation.
Furthermore, in order to ensure the validity and reliability of our findings, various sensitivity analyses and robustness checks were conducted. Sensitivity analyses tested the robustness of the observed correlation to potential outliers and variations in the time frame, while robustness checks scrutinized the stability of the correlation under different statistical models, affirming the veracity of the observed relation and guarding against spurious associations.
In sum, the methodological approach adopted by our research team seamlessly navigated the juncture between the frivolous pursuit of woodchuck ponderings and the consequential realm of energy consumption, culminating in the illumination of an unforeseen entwining of two seemingly unrelated subjects. This unwavering dedication to exuberant inquiry and meticulous analysis forms the bedrock of our methodological framework, allowing for the unfurling of a delightfully quirky narrative amidst the rigors of academic inquiry.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a 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 Google searches for 'how much wood can a woodchuck chuck' and Kerosene used in Venezuela. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.
Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Google Trends and Energy Information Administration .
For the time period 2004 to 2021, you found a correlation 0.8937157, r-squared of 0.7987277, 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]]
"How Much Kerosene for a Woodchuck Spleen: The Correlation Between Google Searches for 'How Much Wood Can a Woodchuck Chuck' and Kerosene Usage in Venezuela"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This study investigates the curious connection between two seemingly disparate entities: the often pondered question of a woodchuck's wood-chucking capacity and the utilization of kerosene in the South American nation of Venezuela. Utilizing data from Google Trends and the Energy Information Administration, our research team uncovered a surprisingly robust correlation between the frequency of Google searches for "how much wood can a woodchuck chuck" and the amount of kerosene consumed in Venezuela from 2004 to 2021. With a correlation coefficient of 0.8937157 and p < 0.01, the findings indicate a noteworthy association that defies conventional expectations. This investigation not only sheds light on the whimsical and unexpected intersections within seemingly unrelated subject matters but also adds a touch of levity to the typically serious field of scholarly inquiry. The implications of these findings spark contemplation on the lively interplay of seemingly disconnected phenomena and offer an amusing divergence from the traditional research landscape.
-------
And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
In the realm of academic inquiry, serendipitous discoveries often emerge from the most unexpected quarters. The intersection of seemingly incongruous subjects has yielded a pantheon of scholarly insights, from the fortuitous discovery of penicillin to the unearthing of the Higgs boson. The present study embarks on a similarly whimsical journey, venturing into the unlikely link between the obscure musings of a woodchuck's arboreal prowess and the pressing energy needs of a nation in South America.
The inquiry commences with the perennial, albeit nonsensical, question that has long titillated the human psyche – "how much wood can a woodchuck chuck?" This enigmatized query, an allegorical emblem of intellectual contemplation, has transcended generations, perpetually puzzling philosophers and laypersons alike. A Google Trends analysis of the search frequency for this conundrum reveals intriguing patterns, guiding us through the labyrinth of internet queries to an unexpected destination – the kerosene consumption landscape in Venezuela.
In juxtaposing the seemingly trivial pursuit of woodchuck-related inquiries with the sobering energy consumption data of a nation, we are propelled into a realm of delightful curiosity and exhilarating disbelief. The correlation unveiled through rigorous statistical analysis prompts a reevaluation of the age-old adage "as useless as a woodchuck on kerosene day." The juxtaposition of these two disparate domains sets the stage for a whimsical narrative, inviting readers to join us in an exploratory journey through the unexpected corridors of scholarly inquiry.
As we embark on this investigative odyssey, we invite the scholarly community to partake in the revelry and intellectual frivolity of our findings. The amalgamation of analytical rigor and serendipitous discovery paints a peculiar portrait of the interconnectedness of our world, where the seemingly preposterous finds communion with the ostensibly consequential. In the spirit of academic merriment, we implore our readers to approach our inquiry with a discerning eye, for, as Lewis Carroll once observed, "What is the use of a book without pictures or conversations?" Welcome to the whimsically woven tapestry of "How Much Kerosene for a Woodchuck Spleen: The Correlation Between Google Searches for 'How Much Wood Can a Woodchuck Chuck' and Kerosene Usage in Venezuela."
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[RESULTS]]
ChatGPT:
[[RESULTS]]
Upon delving into the bosom of our data, the statistical relationship between Google queries for "how much wood can a woodchuck chuck" and the consumption of kerosene in Venezuela emerges as a topic of unexpected intrigue. The correlation coefficient of 0.8937157 denotes a robust association between the two seemingly disparate phenomena, revealing an intriguing interplay that defies conventional logic. This finding is further bolstered by an r-squared value of 0.7987277, suggesting that approximately 79.87% of the variability in kerosene usage in Venezuela can be explained by the frequency of inquiries about woodchuck wood-chucking capabilities. The p-value of < 0.01 substantiates the statistical significance of this correlation, affirming its validity beyond the realms of arbitrary chance.
Notably, the strong correlation is visually represented in Fig. 1, where a scatterplot illustrates the near-linear relationship between Google searches for the enigmatic question and kerosene consumption in Venezuela. The figures do not lie, and the stark alignment of data points on the scatterplot unequivocally accentuates the unexpected connection between these seemingly unrelated subjects.
These findings challenge traditional expectations and spark contemplation on the whimsical and unpredictable facets of scholarly exploration, offering a novel perspective on the interconnectedness of ostensibly incongruous phenomena. The implications of this correlation transcend conventional academic discourse, permeating the very fabric of conceptual interplay and inviting a newfound appreciation for the serendipitous nature of scholarly inquiry.
In the sober domain of statistical analysis, our research findings herald an unprecedented fusion of the ridiculous and the consequential, embracing the lighthearted revelry that the academic landscape rarely entertains. The robust correlation between the woodchuck's conundrum and the utilization of kerosene in Venezuela not only transcends conventional scholastic paradigms but also instills a touch of whimsy in the oft-stoic realm of research inquiry.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a 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 Google searches for 'how much wood can a woodchuck chuck' and Kerosene used in Venezuela. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.
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]]
"How Much Kerosene for a Woodchuck Spleen: The Correlation Between Google Searches for 'How Much Wood Can a Woodchuck Chuck' and Kerosene Usage in Venezuela"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This study investigates the curious connection between two seemingly disparate entities: the often pondered question of a woodchuck's wood-chucking capacity and the utilization of kerosene in the South American nation of Venezuela. Utilizing data from Google Trends and the Energy Information Administration, our research team uncovered a surprisingly robust correlation between the frequency of Google searches for "how much wood can a woodchuck chuck" and the amount of kerosene consumed in Venezuela from 2004 to 2021. With a correlation coefficient of 0.8937157 and p < 0.01, the findings indicate a noteworthy association that defies conventional expectations. This investigation not only sheds light on the whimsical and unexpected intersections within seemingly unrelated subject matters but also adds a touch of levity to the typically serious field of scholarly inquiry. The implications of these findings spark contemplation on the lively interplay of seemingly disconnected phenomena and offer an amusing divergence from the traditional research landscape.
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The obscure and enigmatic correlation between Google searches for "how much wood can a woodchuck chuck" and kerosene consumption in Venezuela has perplexed researchers for decades. Early explorations by Smith and Doe (2008) hinted at a potential connection, albeit in a manner that was somewhat obscured by the gravitational pull of traditional scholarly inquiry. Jones et al. (2012) similarly delved into the intricate web of woodchuck-related ponderings, laying the groundwork for a paradigm shift in the scholarly exploration of seemingly unrelated subject matters.
Venturing into the labyrinth of literature, in "The Woodchuck Chronicles: A Comprehensive Study of Rodent Arboreal Aptitude," the authors provide a thorough analysis of the woodchuck's capacity for chucking wood, ultimately reframing the quintessential inquiry as a metaphor for humanity's unyielding pursuit of knowledge. Parallel to this, "Kerosene: A Combustible Commodity" by Brown and Johnson offers an extensive overview of kerosene usage and its implications in various societal contexts, gesturing towards the complex interplay of energy dynamics on a global scale.
The works of fiction, such as Gabriel Garcia Marquez's "One Hundred Years of Solitude" and Isabel Allende's "The House of the Spirits," serve as literary testaments to the vibrant and tumultuous tapestry of Venezuelan history, providing contextual undercurrents to the underlying narrative of kerosene consumption within the nation. The unrestrained imaginings of these authors mirror the capricious nature of our investigative pursuits, intertwining the fervor of intellectual inquiry with the whimsy of literary expression.
Furthermore, the internet meme featuring the woodchuck and its proclivity for wood-chucking, often accompanied by an exuberant exclamation of "Chuck Norris!" in homage to the legendary martial artist, carves a light-hearted niche within the digital sphere, marking a resonance with the seemingly incongruous nature of our research interests. This convergence of pop culture and academic intrigue epitomizes the delightful whimsy that permeates our scholarly exegesis, inviting readers to confront the unanticipated with an indulgent chuckle.
The fusion of seemingly unrelated subject matters in this investigation stands as a symphonic ode to the animated interplay of scholarly whimsy and rigorous inquiry. As we untangle the seemingly ludicrous bonds that tether the woodchuck's enigma to the kerosene consumption landscape in Venezuela, we beckon the scholarly community to revel in the wonderment of this unconventional convergence. For, in the words of the inimitable Mark Twain, "The secret of getting ahead is getting started. The secret of getting started is breaking your complex overwhelming tasks into small manageable tasks, and then starting on the first one – chucking wood or otherwise."
This whimsical expedition into the interstices of academic scholarship serves as a buoyant reminder of the unparalleled vitality of scholarly inquiry, intermingling the incongruous with the insightful in a dance of erudition and mirth.
[[RESULTS]]
Upon delving into the bosom of our data, the statistical relationship between Google queries for "how much wood can a woodchuck chuck" and the consumption of kerosene in Venezuela emerges as a topic of unexpected intrigue. The correlation coefficient of 0.8937157 denotes a robust association between the two seemingly disparate phenomena, revealing an intriguing interplay that defies conventional logic. This finding is further bolstered by an r-squared value of 0.7987277, suggesting that approximately 79.87% of the variability in kerosene usage in Venezuela can be explained by the frequency of inquiries about woodchuck wood-chucking capabilities. The p-value of < 0.01 substantiates the statistical significance of this correlation, affirming its validity beyond the realms of arbitrary chance.
Notably, the strong correlation is visually represented in Fig. 1, where a scatterplot illustrates the near-linear relationship between Google searches for the enigmatic question and kerosene consumption in Venezuela. The figures do not lie, and the stark alignment of data points on the scatterplot unequivocally accentuates the unexpected connection between these seemingly unrelated subjects.
These findings challenge traditional expectations and spark contemplation on the whimsical and unpredictable facets of scholarly exploration, offering a novel perspective on the interconnectedness of ostensibly incongruous phenomena. The implications of this correlation transcend conventional academic discourse, permeating the very fabric of conceptual interplay and inviting a newfound appreciation for the serendipitous nature of scholarly inquiry.
In the sober domain of statistical analysis, our research findings herald an unprecedented fusion of the ridiculous and the consequential, embracing the lighthearted revelry that the academic landscape rarely entertains. The robust correlation between the woodchuck's conundrum and the utilization of kerosene in Venezuela not only transcends conventional scholastic paradigms but also instills a touch of whimsy in the oft-stoic realm of research inquiry.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[DISCUSSION]]
ChatGPT:
[[DISCUSSION]]
The substantial correlation between Google searches for "how much wood can a woodchuck chuck" and kerosene usage in Venezuela is a veritable testament to the capricious and interconnected nature of seemingly unrelated phenomena. Our study, in alignment with prior scholarly explorations, not only unraveled this unexpected association but also lent empirical support to the lighthearted musings present in the literature. Smith and Doe (2008) and Jones et al. (2012) initially prodded at the potential correlation, hinting at a connection that was perhaps overshadowed by the gravity of traditional academic pursuits. Venturing further into the labyrinth of literature, the woodchuck-related inquiries and the energy dynamics of kerosene usage have artfully coalesced into an unlikely marriage of scholarly fascination.
Moreover, the literary works of Marquez and Allende afford a nuanced understanding of Venezuela's historical narrative, seemingly resonating with the unexpected correlation unveiled in our findings. The intertwining of literature with the scholarly pursuit mirrors the spirited whimsy that permeates our investigation, knitting the heartfelt fervor of intellectual inquiry with the lighthearted dalliance of literary expression. The pervasive cultural phenomenon of the woodchuck meme, with its nod to the legendary Chuck Norris, likewise found a whimsical parallel in our scholarly journey, epitomizing the delightful fusion of pop culture and rigorous inquiry.
Our research, with a correlation coefficient of 0.8937157 and a statistical significance affirmed by the p-value of < 0.01, unequivocally amplifies the academic vitality inherent in this seemingly unconventional convergence. These findings stand as an eloquent testimony to the captivating amalgamation of rigorous inquiry and exuberant revelry, echoing the buoyant sentiments espoused by the iconic Mark Twain. The scholarly community is beckoned to revel in the wonderment of this unconventional fusion, where the seemingly preposterous emerges as a vibrant reminder of the unbounded vitality underpinning the academic realm. In the continuum of scholarly discourse, our investigation carves a lighthearted niche, instilling verve and whimsy into the typically sober terrain of research inquiry.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a 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 Google searches for 'how much wood can a woodchuck chuck' and Kerosene used in Venezuela. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.
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]]
"How Much Kerosene for a Woodchuck Spleen: The Correlation Between Google Searches for 'How Much Wood Can a Woodchuck Chuck' and Kerosene Usage in Venezuela"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This study investigates the curious connection between two seemingly disparate entities: the often pondered question of a woodchuck's wood-chucking capacity and the utilization of kerosene in the South American nation of Venezuela. Utilizing data from Google Trends and the Energy Information Administration, our research team uncovered a surprisingly robust correlation between the frequency of Google searches for "how much wood can a woodchuck chuck" and the amount of kerosene consumed in Venezuela from 2004 to 2021. With a correlation coefficient of 0.8937157 and p < 0.01, the findings indicate a noteworthy association that defies conventional expectations. This investigation not only sheds light on the whimsical and unexpected intersections within seemingly unrelated subject matters but also adds a touch of levity to the typically serious field of scholarly inquiry. The implications of these findings spark contemplation on the lively interplay of seemingly disconnected phenomena and offer an amusing divergence from the traditional research landscape.
[[INTRDUCTION]]
In the realm of academic inquiry, serendipitous discoveries often emerge from the most unexpected quarters. The intersection of seemingly incongruous subjects has yielded a pantheon of scholarly insights, from the fortuitous discovery of penicillin to the unearthing of the Higgs boson. The present study embarks on a similarly whimsical journey, venturing into the unlikely link between the obscure musings of a woodchuck's arboreal prowess and the pressing energy needs of a nation in South America.
The inquiry commences with the perennial, albeit nonsensical, question that has long titillated the human psyche – "how much wood can a woodchuck chuck?" This enigmatized query, an allegorical emblem of intellectual contemplation, has transcended generations, perpetually puzzling philosophers and laypersons alike. A Google Trends analysis of the search frequency for this conundrum reveals intriguing patterns, guiding us through the labyrinth of internet queries to an unexpected destination – the kerosene consumption landscape in Venezuela.
In juxtaposing the seemingly trivial pursuit of woodchuck-related inquiries with the sobering energy consumption data of a nation, we are propelled into a realm of delightful curiosity and exhilarating disbelief. The correlation unveiled through rigorous statistical analysis prompts a reevaluation of the age-old adage "as useless as a woodchuck on kerosene day." The juxtaposition of these two disparate domains sets the stage for a whimsical narrative, inviting readers to join us in an exploratory journey through the unexpected corridors of scholarly inquiry.
As we embark on this investigative odyssey, we invite the scholarly community to partake in the revelry and intellectual frivolity of our findings. The amalgamation of analytical rigor and serendipitous discovery paints a peculiar portrait of the interconnectedness of our world, where the seemingly preposterous finds communion with the ostensibly consequential. In the spirit of academic merriment, we implore our readers to approach our inquiry with a discerning eye, for, as Lewis Carroll once observed, "What is the use of a book without pictures or conversations?" Welcome to the whimsically woven tapestry of "How Much Kerosene for a Woodchuck Spleen: The Correlation Between Google Searches for 'How Much Wood Can a Woodchuck Chuck' and Kerosene Usage in Venezuela."
[[RESULTS]]
Upon delving into the bosom of our data, the statistical relationship between Google queries for "how much wood can a woodchuck chuck" and the consumption of kerosene in Venezuela emerges as a topic of unexpected intrigue. The correlation coefficient of 0.8937157 denotes a robust association between the two seemingly disparate phenomena, revealing an intriguing interplay that defies conventional logic. This finding is further bolstered by an r-squared value of 0.7987277, suggesting that approximately 79.87% of the variability in kerosene usage in Venezuela can be explained by the frequency of inquiries about woodchuck wood-chucking capabilities. The p-value of < 0.01 substantiates the statistical significance of this correlation, affirming its validity beyond the realms of arbitrary chance.
Notably, the strong correlation is visually represented in Fig. 1, where a scatterplot illustrates the near-linear relationship between Google searches for the enigmatic question and kerosene consumption in Venezuela. The figures do not lie, and the stark alignment of data points on the scatterplot unequivocally accentuates the unexpected connection between these seemingly unrelated subjects.
These findings challenge traditional expectations and spark contemplation on the whimsical and unpredictable facets of scholarly exploration, offering a novel perspective on the interconnectedness of ostensibly incongruous phenomena. The implications of this correlation transcend conventional academic discourse, permeating the very fabric of conceptual interplay and inviting a newfound appreciation for the serendipitous nature of scholarly inquiry.
In the sober domain of statistical analysis, our research findings herald an unprecedented fusion of the ridiculous and the consequential, embracing the lighthearted revelry that the academic landscape rarely entertains. The robust correlation between the woodchuck's conundrum and the utilization of kerosene in Venezuela not only transcends conventional scholastic paradigms but also instills a touch of whimsy in the oft-stoic realm of research inquiry.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[CONCLUSION]]
ChatGPT:
[[CONCLUSION]]
In conclusion, this study unravels the curious yet robust correlation between the frivolous inquiry of a woodchuck's wood-chucking capacity and the significant energy landscape in Venezuela. The unexpected nexus between these two seemingly incongruous subjects challenges conventional scholarly paradigms, beckoning us to embrace the delightful enigma of research serendipity. As the data unequivocally illustrates, the frequency of Google searches for "how much wood can a woodchuck chuck" holds a compelling association with kerosene consumption in Venezuela, exhibiting a correlation coefficient that defies traditional expectations.
The implications of this correlation extend far beyond the realms of statistical analysis, breathing new whimsy into the oft-stoic corridors of academic investigation. This unexpected alignment of seemingly unrelated phenomena invites us to reevaluate the interconnectedness of our world, echoing the sentiment that sometimes, in the labyrinth of scholarly inquiry, the most delightful discoveries emerge from the most unexpected corners.
As we partake in the revelry of our findings, let us not overlook the inherent charm of our academic odyssey. For in the words of G.K. Chesterton, "An adventure is only an inconvenience rightly considered." Therefore, let us consider our journey through the enigmatic interplay of woodchucks and kerosene as an adventure, one that brings a touch of levity to the scholarly landscape.
In light of these findings, it is evident that no further research in this area is necessitated. The robustness of the correlation and the sheer whimsical charm it imparts to scholarly discourse leave little room for doubt. Thus, as we bid adieu to this eccentric exploration, we do so with a newfound appreciation for the unexpected interplay of seemingly disparate subjects and an unwavering conviction that, sometimes, the most whimsical avenues of inquiry lead to the most delightful revelations.
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 How Much Kerosene for a Woodchuck Spleen: The Correlation Between Google Searches for 'How Much Wood Can a Woodchuck Chuck' and Kerosene Usage in Venezuela. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.
ChatGPT:
The Journal of Irreverent Eclectic Studies
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of nonprofit research organizations and associations. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding nonprofit, academic, or scientific association or organization that would sponsor research that resulted in a paper entited How Much Kerosene for a Woodchuck Spleen: The Correlation Between Google Searches for 'How Much Wood Can a Woodchuck Chuck' and Kerosene Usage in Venezuela. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.
ChatGPT:
The International Consortium for Zany Zoological Studies
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 How Much Kerosene for a Woodchuck Spleen: The Correlation Between Google Searches for 'How Much Wood Can a Woodchuck Chuck' and Kerosene Usage in Venezuela with an abstract of This study investigates the curious connection between two seemingly disparate entities: the often pondered question of a woodchuck's wood-chucking capacity and the utilization of kerosene in the South American nation of Venezuela. Utilizing data from Google Trends and the Energy Information Administration, our research team uncovered a surprisingly robust correlation between the frequency of Google searches for "how much wood can a woodchuck chuck" and the amount of kerosene consumed in Venezuela from 2004 to 2021. With a correlation coefficient of 0.8937157 and p < 0.01, the findings indicate a noteworthy association that defies conventional expectations. This investigation not only sheds light on the whimsical and unexpected intersections within seemingly unrelated subject matters but also adds a touch of levity to the typically serious field of scholarly inquiry. The implications of these findings spark contemplation on the lively interplay of seemingly disconnected phenomena and offer an amusing divergence from the traditional research landscape.
ChatGPT:
woodchuck chuck, kerosene usage, Venezuela, Google searches, correlation, Google Trends, Energy Information Administration, woodchuck wood-chucking capacity
*There is a bunch of Python happening behind the scenes to turn this prompt sequence into a PDF.
Discover a new correlation
View all correlations
View all research papers
Report an error
Data details
Google searches for 'how much wood can a woodchuck chuck'Detailed data title: Relative volume of Google searches for 'how much wood can a woodchuck chuck' (Worldwide, without quotes)
Source: Google Trends
Additional Info: Relative search volume (not absolute numbers)
See what else correlates with Google searches for 'how much wood can a woodchuck chuck'
Kerosene used in Venezuela
Detailed data title: Volume of kerosene used consumed in Venezuela in millions of barrels per day
Source: Energy Information Administration
See what else correlates with Kerosene used in Venezuela
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 = 0.7987277 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 79.9% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Kerosene used in Venezuela) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Google searches for 'how much wood can a woodchuck chuck') over the 18 years from 2004 through 2021.
p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 5.8E-7. 0.0000005838058030037291000000
The p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme. More specifically the p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme if we had only tested one pair of variables one time.
But I am a p-villain. I absolutely did not test only one pair of variables one time. I correlated hundreds of millions of pairs of variables. I threw boatloads of data into an industrial-sized blender to find this correlation.
Who is going to stop me? p-value reporting doesn't require me to report how many calculations I had to go through in order to find a low p-value!
On average, you will find a correaltion as strong as 0.89 in 5.8E-5% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 1,712,898 random variables You don't actually need 1 million variables to find a correlation like this one. I don't have that many variables in my database. You can also correlate variables that are not independent. I do this a lot.
p-value calculations are useful for understanding the probability of a result happening by chance. They are most useful when used to highlight the risk of a fluke outcome. For example, if you calculate a p-value of 0.30, the risk that the result is a fluke is high. It is good to know that! But there are lots of ways to get a p-value of less than 0.01, as evidenced by this project.
In this particular case, the values are so extreme as to be meaningless. That's why no one reports p-values with specificity after they drop below 0.01.
Just to be clear: I'm being completely transparent about the calculations. There is no math trickery. This is just how statistics shakes out when you calculate hundreds of millions of random correlations.
with the same 17 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 17 because we have two variables measured over a period of 18 years. It's just the number of years minus ( the number of variables minus one ), which in this case simplifies to the number of years minus one.
you would randomly expect to find a correlation as strong as this one.
[ 0.73, 0.96 ] 95% correlation confidence interval (using the Fisher z-transformation)
The confidence interval is an estimate the range of the value of the correlation coefficient, using the correlation itself as an input. The values are meant to be the low and high end of the correlation coefficient with 95% confidence.
This one is a bit more complciated than the other calculations, but I include it because many people have been pushing for confidence intervals instead of p-value calculations (for example: NEJM. However, if you are dredging data, you can reliably find yourself in the 5%. That's my goal!
All values for the years included above: If I were being very sneaky, I could trim years from the beginning or end of the datasets to increase the correlation on some pairs of variables. I don't do that because there are already plenty of correlations in my database without monkeying with the years.
Still, sometimes one of the variables has more years of data available than the other. This page only shows the overlapping years. To see all the years, click on "See what else correlates with..." link above.
| 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | |
| Google searches for 'how much wood can a woodchuck chuck' (Rel. search volume) | 25.8333 | 10.5 | 5.75 | 2.58333 | 10.75 | 8.83333 | 44.4167 | 26.3333 | 40.8333 | 37.5833 | 44.1667 | 58.6667 | 24.6667 | 29.5833 | 25.3333 | 20.1667 | 15.25 | 11.1667 |
| Kerosene used in Venezuela (Million Barrels/Day) | 0.485765 | 0.487096 | 0.127068 | 0 | 0.337923 | 0.360027 | 1 | 0.296493 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0.608329 | 0.434521 | 0.21726 |
Why this works
- Data dredging: I have 25,153 variables in my database. I compare all these variables against each other to find ones that randomly match up. That's 632,673,409 correlation calculations! This is called “data dredging.” Instead of starting with a hypothesis and testing it, I instead abused the data to see what correlations shake out. It’s a dangerous way to go about analysis, because any sufficiently large dataset will yield strong correlations completely at random.
- Lack of causal connection: There is probably
Because these pages are automatically generated, it's possible that the two variables you are viewing are in fact causually related. I take steps to prevent the obvious ones from showing on the site (I don't let data about the weather in one city correlate with the weather in a neighboring city, for example), but sometimes they still pop up. If they are related, cool! You found a loophole.
no direct connection between these variables, despite what the AI says above. This is exacerbated by the fact that I used "Years" as the base variable. Lots of things happen in a year that are not related to each other! Most studies would use something like "one person" in stead of "one year" to be the "thing" studied. - Observations not independent: For many variables, sequential years are not independent of each other. If a population of people is continuously doing something every day, there is no reason to think they would suddenly change how they are doing that thing on January 1. A simple
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([25.8333,10.5,5.75,2.58333,10.75,8.83333,44.4167,26.3333,40.8333,37.5833,44.1667,58.6667,24.6667,29.5833,25.3333,20.1667,15.25,11.1667,])
array_2 = np.array([0.485765,0.487096,0.127068,0,0.337923,0.360027,1,0.296493,1,1,1,2,1,1,1,0.608329,0.434521,0.21726,])
array_1_name = "Google searches for 'how much wood can a woodchuck chuck'"
array_2_name = "Kerosene used in Venezuela"
# 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:
- High resolution line chart
The image linked here is a Scalable Vector Graphic (SVG). It is the highest resolution that is possible to achieve. It scales up beyond the size of the observable universe without pixelating. You do not need to email me asking if I have a higher resolution image. I do not. The physical limitations of our universe prevent me from providing you with an image that is any higher resolution than this one.
If you insert it into a PowerPoint presentation (a tool well-known for managing things that are the scale of the universe), you can right-click > "Ungroup" or "Create Shape" and then edit the lines and text directly. You can also change the colors this way.
Alternatively you can use a tool like Inkscape. - High resolution line chart, optimized for mobile
- Alternative high resolution line chart
- Scatterplot
- Portable line chart (png)
- Portable line chart (png), optimized for mobile
- Line chart for only Google searches for 'how much wood can a woodchuck chuck'
- Line chart for only Kerosene used in Venezuela
- AI-generated correlation image
- The spurious research paper: How Much Kerosene for a Woodchuck Spleen: The Correlation Between Google Searches for 'How Much Wood Can a Woodchuck Chuck' and Kerosene Usage in Venezuela
Your rating is much appreciated!
Correlation ID: 4245 · Black Variable ID: 1412 · Red Variable ID: 25071
