Spurious correlation #4,302 · View random
A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Arkansas and the second variable is Gasoline pumped in Germany. The chart goes from 1991 to 2020, and the two variables track closely in value over that time.

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Arkansas and the second variable is Gasoline pumped in Germany. The chart goes from 1991 to 2020, and the two variables track closely in value over that time.

Download png, svg

AI explanation

As the enthusiasm for the Democrat candidate waned in Arkansas, the collective sighs led to a minor atmospheric disturbance. This disturbance, in turn, disrupted the jet stream in a way that slightly altered the atmospheric pressure systems above Germany, ultimately leading to a minuscule decrease in the efficiency of gasoline combustion. Remember, every vote counts, even in the world of fluid dynamics and atmospheric science!

^{Show image generation prompt} Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image of a futuristic cybernetic landscape with a serene farmland in the foreground. Two high-tech gas pumps stand prominently in the center, emitting a faint blue light. The surrounding atmosphere is filled with subtle futuristic elements and technology, indicating the interconnectedness of the world. A digital representation of the jet stream hangs overhead, with faint ripples appearing due to the collective sighs of the people. Overlaid on the scene are translucent outlines of people casting their votes, symbolizing the impact of individual choices on a global scale. The image captures the interconnectedness of the world, linking the seemingly disparate events in Arkansas and Germany. 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: Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Arkansas and Gasoline pumped in Germany. 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: Psychedelic Cybernetic art Cubism Low poly Vaporwave
ChatGPT: Cybernetic 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 Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Arkansas and Gasoline pumped in Germany, in the following situation: As the enthusiasm for the Democrat candidate waned in Arkansas, the collective sighs led to a minor atmospheric disturbance. This disturbance, in turn, disrupted the jet stream in a way that slightly altered the atmospheric pressure systems above Germany, ultimately leading to a minuscule decrease in the efficiency of gasoline combustion. Remember, every vote counts, even in the world of fluid dynamics and atmospheric science!. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In the serene farmlands of Arkansas, the side-by-side images of gas pumps slowly registered a decrease in activity while the excitement for the Democratic presidential candidate seemed to taper off. The collective sighs released into the air created a slight ripple, ultimately causing a gentle disruption in the jet stream above. This minor shift then had a subtle impact on the atmospheric pressure systems over the bustling streets of Germany, resulting in a barely noticeable decrease in the efficiency of gasoline combustion. Each vote in Arkansas was felt across the oceans as a tiny ripple in the flow of gasoline in Germany.

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: [ Cybernetic art ] and depicting this scene: In the serene farmlands of Arkansas, the side-by-side images of gas pumps slowly registered a decrease in activity while the excitement for the Democratic presidential candidate seemed to taper off. The collective sighs released into the air created a slight ripple, ultimately causing a gentle disruption in the jet stream above. This minor shift then had a subtle impact on the atmospheric pressure systems over the bustling streets of Germany, resulting in a barely noticeable decrease in the efficiency of gasoline combustion. Each vote in Arkansas was felt across the oceans as a tiny ripple in the flow of gasoline in Germany. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image of a futuristic cybernetic landscape with a serene farmland in the foreground. Two high-tech gas pumps stand prominently in the center, emitting a faint blue light. The surrounding atmosphere is filled with subtle futuristic elements and technology, indicating the interconnectedness of the world. A digital representation of the jet stream hangs overhead, with faint ripples appearing due to the collective sighs of the people. Overlaid on the scene are translucent outlines of people casting their votes, symbolizing the impact of individual choices on a global scale. The image captures the interconnectedness of the world, linking the seemingly disparate events in Arkansas and Germany.

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

I sequence the requests into multiple prompts because I find GPT 3.5 to perform much better with short, well-managed contexts. Thus, I track the context directly in Python and only ask ChatGPT targeted questions.
^{Show prompt for explanation} Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 (fine-tuned)
System prompt: You provide humorous responses in the form of plausible sounding explanations for correlations. You assume the correlation is causative for the purpose of the explanation even if it is ridiculous. You do not chat with the user, you only reply with the causal connection explanation and nothing else.
User prompt: Please make up a funny explanation for how a decrease in Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Arkansas caused Gasoline pumped in Germany to decrease. Add a funny one-liner at the end.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)

Fueling the Vote: A Surprising Correlation Between Democrat Votes in Arkansas and Gasoline Consumption in Germany

The Journal of Transcontinental Political Trends

Jan 2024

Reminder: This paper is AI-generated. Not real!

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

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.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 Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Arkansas and Gasoline pumped in Germany. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

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

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Perhaps you also got inspiration from some board games that are vaugely related.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Fueling the Vote: A Surprising Correlation Between Democrat Votes in Arkansas and Gasoline Consumption in Germany

[[ABSTRACT]]
The relationship between political preferences and economic variables has intrigued scholars for decades. In this research, we investigate the improbable correlation between the number of votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Arkansas and the volume of gasoline pumped in Germany. Utilizing data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, we conducted a meticulous analysis covering the years 1991 to 2020. Surprisingly, our findings reveal a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9694081 and p < 0.01, indicating a striking connection between these seemingly disparate factors. This unexpected correlation demands further investigation and may have implications for understanding the global interconnectedness of socio-political and economic dynamics. While the idea of Arkansan votes influencing German gasoline consumption may sound far-fetched, the data speaks for itself, challenging conventional wisdom and beckoning for a closer examination of the intricate relationship between voting behaviors and international energy trends.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
Introduction
The intersection of politics and economics has long been a fertile ground for scholarly inquiry, yielding insights that are sometimes as surprising as finding a unicorn in a cornfield. In this study, we delve into the perplexing realm of political voting preferences and economic variables, aiming to unravel the mysterious connection between the number of votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Arkansas and the volume of gasoline guzzled in Germany. Yes, you read that right - we're venturing into the wild and wacky world where American politics seemingly meets European fuel consumption.
As any good researcher knows, a wild hypothesis and a dash of statistical analysis can lead to some eyebrow-raising discoveries. Armed with data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, we set out on a mission to determine if there's more to this peculiar pairing than meets the eye. Our quest has led us to uncover a correlation coefficient of 0.9694081 and a p-value of less than 0.01, signaling a relationship so strong, it's as if these variables were dancing a perfect tango in statistical harmony.
Now, the idea of Arkansas, a state known for its picturesque landscapes and mouthwatering barbecue, exerting any influence on the gasoline habits of our friends across the Atlantic might seem about as plausible as a unicorn giving a TED talk. But let us assure you, dear reader, that the numbers don't lie – they just sometimes have a penchant for wearing disguises and throwing surprise parties in the data.
This unexpected correlation has left us scratching our heads and rethinking what we thought we knew about the intricate dance between demographics, energy consumption, and the democratic process. It's as if the data has tapped us on the shoulder, whispered a riddle in our ears, and then vanished into the night, leaving us with a mystery begging to be solved.
So, buckle up and prepare for a journey through the twisty roads of statistical analysis, where even the most improbable connections can hold the keys to unlocking new understandings of our intertwined world. Let's unravel this curious conundrum and see where it leads us, armed with equal parts skepticism and scientific curiosity - because sometimes, in the world of research, truth really is stranger than fiction.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

To comprehend the perplexing correlation between the voting patterns in Arkansas and the gasoline consumption in Germany, we must first delve into the existing literature that has attempted to shed light on the enigmatic interplay of political choices and international fuel usage. While scholars have traditionally focused on more conventional connections between economic indicators and electoral behaviors, the unorthodox relationship we seek to explore demands a broader perspective – and perhaps a healthy dose of whimsy.

A seminal work by Smith et al. (2015) initially drew attention to unexpected global correlations, albeit in a different context. Their study, "Economic Trends in an Interconnected World," highlighted the potent interconnectedness of seemingly disparate economic variables, paving the way for our exploration of unconventional relationships. And indeed, what could be more unconventional than the quirky coupling of Arkansas votes and German gas?

Building upon this foundation, Doe and Jones (2018) examined the intricate web of international consumer behaviors in "Global Fuel Demands: Beyond Borders." While their focus was primarily on broader consumption patterns, their work laid the groundwork for contemplating the influence of political factors on transnational energy usage. Little did they know that such influence might lead us straight to the heart of the American Midwest and across the Atlantic to the autobahns of Germany.

Venturing into the realm of non-fiction literature, "The Global Puzzle of Interconnectedness" by Dr. Lorem Ipsum (2017) proposed a framework for understanding the unexpected links between seemingly unrelated global phenomena. While the book's scholarly rigor is undeniable, one can't help but wonder if the author had any inkling of the whimsical connections we are about to elucidate.

Turning to fictional works, "The Gasoline Gambit" by J.K. Rolling (2010) tantalizingly blurs the lines between geopolitical intrigue and fuel-related conundrums, offering a playful imagining of what happens when political machinations collide with international hydrocarbon dynamics. While the events of the book may be purely fictional, who's to say that life doesn't imitate art in the most unexpected ways?

In the world of board games, the classic title "Arkansas Avenue and Diesel Drive" unexpectedly combines Monopoly-esque property acquisition with a diesel-fueled twist. While this may seem light-hearted, one can't help but ponder the parallels between strategic property management and the geopolitical implications of fuel consumption. After all, isn't the game of politics just an elaborate, high-stakes version of Monopoly played on the world stage?

With this eclectic array of literature as our guide, we embark on our own expedition into the labyrinthine landscape of political affiliations, gasoline gushes, and the curious connections that bind them. What strange and wondrous discoveries await us in this bemusing journey? Only time, and perhaps a few statistical analyses, will tell.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.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 Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Arkansas and Gasoline pumped in Germany. 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 MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and Energy Information Administration . You used data from 1991 to 2020

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]]
Fueling the Vote: A Surprising Correlation Between Democrat Votes in Arkansas and Gasoline Consumption in Germany

[[ABSTRACT]]
The relationship between political preferences and economic variables has intrigued scholars for decades. In this research, we investigate the improbable correlation between the number of votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Arkansas and the volume of gasoline pumped in Germany. Utilizing data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, we conducted a meticulous analysis covering the years 1991 to 2020. Surprisingly, our findings reveal a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9694081 and p < 0.01, indicating a striking connection between these seemingly disparate factors. This unexpected correlation demands further investigation and may have implications for understanding the global interconnectedness of socio-political and economic dynamics. While the idea of Arkansan votes influencing German gasoline consumption may sound far-fetched, the data speaks for itself, challenging conventional wisdom and beckoning for a closer examination of the intricate relationship between voting behaviors and international energy trends.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
Introduction
The intersection of politics and economics has long been a fertile ground for scholarly inquiry, yielding insights that are sometimes as surprising as finding a unicorn in a cornfield. In this study, we delve into the perplexing realm of political voting preferences and economic variables, aiming to unravel the mysterious connection between the number of votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Arkansas and the volume of gasoline guzzled in Germany. Yes, you read that right - we're venturing into the wild and wacky world where American politics seemingly meets European fuel consumption.
As any good researcher knows, a wild hypothesis and a dash of statistical analysis can lead to some eyebrow-raising discoveries. Armed with data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, we set out on a mission to determine if there's more to this peculiar pairing than meets the eye. Our quest has led us to uncover a correlation coefficient of 0.9694081 and a p-value of less than 0.01, signaling a relationship so strong, it's as if these variables were dancing a perfect tango in statistical harmony.
Now, the idea of Arkansas, a state known for its picturesque landscapes and mouthwatering barbecue, exerting any influence on the gasoline habits of our friends across the Atlantic might seem about as plausible as a unicorn giving a TED talk. But let us assure you, dear reader, that the numbers don't lie – they just sometimes have a penchant for wearing disguises and throwing surprise parties in the data.
This unexpected correlation has left us scratching our heads and rethinking what we thought we knew about the intricate dance between demographics, energy consumption, and the democratic process. It's as if the data has tapped us on the shoulder, whispered a riddle in our ears, and then vanished into the night, leaving us with a mystery begging to be solved.
So, buckle up and prepare for a journey through the twisty roads of statistical analysis, where even the most improbable connections can hold the keys to unlocking new understandings of our intertwined world. Let's unravel this curious conundrum and see where it leads us, armed with equal parts skepticism and scientific curiosity - because sometimes, in the world of research, truth really is stranger than fiction.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

In order to untangle the enigmatic relationship between votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Arkansas and the gasoline consumption in our Teutonic brethren's homeland, we embarked on a journey that involved more twists and turns than a rollercoaster designed by a group of mischievous statisticians. Our data collection methods were as diverse and varied as the flavors at a multi-cultural buffet, drawing from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration. These sources, while not typically bedfellows, proved to be the unlikely heroes in our quest for understanding this bewitching correlation.

First, we pored over the election data from the Arkansas Secretary of State, scrutinizing the voting patterns and preferences with a level of intensity usually reserved for deciphering ancient hieroglyphics. We then hopped across the pond, virtually speaking, to dip our analytical toes into the pool of German gasoline consumption data, courtesy of the Energy Information Administration. This task was akin to navigating a labyrinth in search of the elusive Minotaur, albeit a Minotaur that smelled vaguely of gasoline and strudel.

To tease out the nuances and subtleties of this intercontinental conundrum, we employed a bewildering array of statistical methods, each more esoteric than the last. Our analysis included time-series analysis, cross-correlation techniques, and the deployment of the mystical Spearman's rank correlation coefficient, which, much like a magician's spell, revealed the hidden connections between two seemingly incongruous variables.

In order to validate our findings and fend off any skeptics who might accuse us of hallucinating numerical patterns, we subjected our data to rigorous sensitivity analysis and Monte Carlo simulations. This involved summoning the spirits of a thousand random number generators and coaxing them to dance in harmonious patterns that would underscore the robustness of our results. As any seasoned researcher knows, a good Monte Carlo simulation is like a fine wine - it's best enjoyed with a healthy dose of skepticism and a side of mind-bending uncertainty.

In this way, we navigated the rapids of data collection, statistical analysis, and validation with a combination of steely determination and a touch of academic whimsy, confident that our methods would stand up to the scrutiny of even the most scrutinous statistician. With our compass pointed firmly towards the shores of statistical significance, we set sail on this scholarly odyssey, prepared to weather the storms of skepticism and confident in our quest to unravel the curious connection between Democratic votes in Arkansas and German gasoline consumption.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.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 Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Arkansas and Gasoline pumped in Germany. 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 MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and Energy Information Administration .

For the time period 1991 to 2020, you found a correlation 0.9694081, r-squared of 0.9397521, 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]]
Fueling the Vote: A Surprising Correlation Between Democrat Votes in Arkansas and Gasoline Consumption in Germany

[[ABSTRACT]]
The relationship between political preferences and economic variables has intrigued scholars for decades. In this research, we investigate the improbable correlation between the number of votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Arkansas and the volume of gasoline pumped in Germany. Utilizing data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, we conducted a meticulous analysis covering the years 1991 to 2020. Surprisingly, our findings reveal a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9694081 and p < 0.01, indicating a striking connection between these seemingly disparate factors. This unexpected correlation demands further investigation and may have implications for understanding the global interconnectedness of socio-political and economic dynamics. While the idea of Arkansan votes influencing German gasoline consumption may sound far-fetched, the data speaks for itself, challenging conventional wisdom and beckoning for a closer examination of the intricate relationship between voting behaviors and international energy trends.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
Introduction
The intersection of politics and economics has long been a fertile ground for scholarly inquiry, yielding insights that are sometimes as surprising as finding a unicorn in a cornfield. In this study, we delve into the perplexing realm of political voting preferences and economic variables, aiming to unravel the mysterious connection between the number of votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Arkansas and the volume of gasoline guzzled in Germany. Yes, you read that right - we're venturing into the wild and wacky world where American politics seemingly meets European fuel consumption.
As any good researcher knows, a wild hypothesis and a dash of statistical analysis can lead to some eyebrow-raising discoveries. Armed with data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, we set out on a mission to determine if there's more to this peculiar pairing than meets the eye. Our quest has led us to uncover a correlation coefficient of 0.9694081 and a p-value of less than 0.01, signaling a relationship so strong, it's as if these variables were dancing a perfect tango in statistical harmony.
Now, the idea of Arkansas, a state known for its picturesque landscapes and mouthwatering barbecue, exerting any influence on the gasoline habits of our friends across the Atlantic might seem about as plausible as a unicorn giving a TED talk. But let us assure you, dear reader, that the numbers don't lie – they just sometimes have a penchant for wearing disguises and throwing surprise parties in the data.
This unexpected correlation has left us scratching our heads and rethinking what we thought we knew about the intricate dance between demographics, energy consumption, and the democratic process. It's as if the data has tapped us on the shoulder, whispered a riddle in our ears, and then vanished into the night, leaving us with a mystery begging to be solved.
So, buckle up and prepare for a journey through the twisty roads of statistical analysis, where even the most improbable connections can hold the keys to unlocking new understandings of our intertwined world. Let's unravel this curious conundrum and see where it leads us, armed with equal parts skepticism and scientific curiosity - because sometimes, in the world of research, truth really is stranger than fiction.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]

ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The analysis of the data collected from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration yielded some truly mind-boggling results. Upon careful examination, we discovered a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9694081 between the number of votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Arkansas and the volume of gasoline pumped in Germany. If that doesn't make you do a double-take, I don't know what will! This relationship is so strong, it's like finding out that peanut butter and jelly actually have a secret handshake behind closed doors.

Furthermore, the r-squared value of 0.9397521 indicates that a whopping 93.97521% of the variation in German gasoline consumption can be explained by the number of Democrat votes in Arkansas. It's as if these two variables were performing a well-rehearsed duet, leaving us wondering if there's a hidden dance-off happening on the international stage.

The p-value of less than 0.01 further solidifies the significance of this connection, as if statistics itself is winking at us and saying, "I told you there's more to this than meets the eye!"

To visualize this unexpected relationship, we present Fig. 1, a scatterplot that clearly depicts the strong correlation between the number of votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Arkansas and the volume of gasoline pumped in Germany. It's like seeing a penguin and a polar bear synchronized swimming – unexpected and yet undeniably captivating.

In conclusion, our findings reveal a fascinating and significant association between political voting patterns in the United States and energy consumption in Germany. This unlikely correlation challenges traditional assumptions and beckons researchers to explore the hidden threads that weave together seemingly disparate aspects of our global tapestry. It's an invitation to delve deeper into the uncharted territories of socio-political and economic interactions, armed with a healthy dose of skepticism and an unwavering commitment to unraveling the enigmatic connections that govern our world.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.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 Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Arkansas and Gasoline pumped in Germany. 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]]
Fueling the Vote: A Surprising Correlation Between Democrat Votes in Arkansas and Gasoline Consumption in Germany

[[ABSTRACT]]
The relationship between political preferences and economic variables has intrigued scholars for decades. In this research, we investigate the improbable correlation between the number of votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Arkansas and the volume of gasoline pumped in Germany. Utilizing data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, we conducted a meticulous analysis covering the years 1991 to 2020. Surprisingly, our findings reveal a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9694081 and p < 0.01, indicating a striking connection between these seemingly disparate factors. This unexpected correlation demands further investigation and may have implications for understanding the global interconnectedness of socio-political and economic dynamics. While the idea of Arkansan votes influencing German gasoline consumption may sound far-fetched, the data speaks for itself, challenging conventional wisdom and beckoning for a closer examination of the intricate relationship between voting behaviors and international energy trends.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
To comprehend the perplexing correlation between the voting patterns in Arkansas and the gasoline consumption in Germany, we must first delve into the existing literature that has attempted to shed light on the enigmatic interplay of political choices and international fuel usage. While scholars have traditionally focused on more conventional connections between economic indicators and electoral behaviors, the unorthodox relationship we seek to explore demands a broader perspective – and perhaps a healthy dose of whimsy.
A seminal work by Smith et al. (2015) initially drew attention to unexpected global correlations, albeit in a different context. Their study, "Economic Trends in an Interconnected World," highlighted the potent interconnectedness of seemingly disparate economic variables, paving the way for our exploration of unconventional relationships. And indeed, what could be more unconventional than the quirky coupling of Arkansas votes and German gas?
Building upon this foundation, Doe and Jones (2018) examined the intricate web of international consumer behaviors in "Global Fuel Demands: Beyond Borders." While their focus was primarily on broader consumption patterns, their work laid the groundwork for contemplating the influence of political factors on transnational energy usage. Little did they know that such influence might lead us straight to the heart of the American Midwest and across the Atlantic to the autobahns of Germany.
Venturing into the realm of non-fiction literature, "The Global Puzzle of Interconnectedness" by Dr. Lorem Ipsum (2017) proposed a framework for understanding the unexpected links between seemingly unrelated global phenomena. While the book's scholarly rigor is undeniable, one can't help but wonder if the author had any inkling of the whimsical connections we are about to elucidate.
Turning to fictional works, "The Gasoline Gambit" by J.K. Rolling (2010) tantalizingly blurs the lines between geopolitical intrigue and fuel-related conundrums, offering a playful imagining of what happens when political machinations collide with international hydrocarbon dynamics. While the events of the book may be purely fictional, who's to say that life doesn't imitate art in the most unexpected ways?
In the world of board games, the classic title "Arkansas Avenue and Diesel Drive" unexpectedly combines Monopoly-esque property acquisition with a diesel-fueled twist. While this may seem light-hearted, one can't help but ponder the parallels between strategic property management and the geopolitical implications of fuel consumption. After all, isn't the game of politics just an elaborate, high-stakes version of Monopoly played on the world stage?
With this eclectic array of literature as our guide, we embark on our own expedition into the labyrinthine landscape of political affiliations, gasoline gushes, and the curious connections that bind them. What strange and wondrous discoveries await us in this bemusing journey? Only time, and perhaps a few statistical analyses, will tell.

[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of the data collected from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration yielded some truly mind-boggling results. Upon careful examination, we discovered a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9694081 between the number of votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Arkansas and the volume of gasoline pumped in Germany. If that doesn't make you do a double-take, I don't know what will! This relationship is so strong, it's like finding out that peanut butter and jelly actually have a secret handshake behind closed doors.
Furthermore, the r-squared value of 0.9397521 indicates that a whopping 93.97521% of the variation in German gasoline consumption can be explained by the number of Democrat votes in Arkansas. It's as if these two variables were performing a well-rehearsed duet, leaving us wondering if there's a hidden dance-off happening on the international stage.
The p-value of less than 0.01 further solidifies the significance of this connection, as if statistics itself is winking at us and saying, "I told you there's more to this than meets the eye!"
To visualize this unexpected relationship, we present Fig. 1, a scatterplot that clearly depicts the strong correlation between the number of votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Arkansas and the volume of gasoline pumped in Germany. It's like seeing a penguin and a polar bear synchronized swimming – unexpected and yet undeniably captivating.
In conclusion, our findings reveal a fascinating and significant association between political voting patterns in the United States and energy consumption in Germany. This unlikely correlation challenges traditional assumptions and beckons researchers to explore the hidden threads that weave together seemingly disparate aspects of our global tapestry. It's an invitation to delve deeper into the uncharted territories of socio-political and economic interactions, armed with a healthy dose of skepticism and an unwavering commitment to unraveling the enigmatic connections that govern our world.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Well, well, well, look what we stumbled upon - a correlation so strong, it's like discovering a secret handshake between long-lost friends. Our results not only echo the quirky connections highlighted in prior research but also add a delightful twist to the scientific discourse, akin to finding a surprise ingredient in a familiar recipe.

Our findings align with Smith et al.'s (2015) emphasis on the interconnectedness of seemingly unrelated global phenomena. Just as they illuminated unexpected global correlations, our study illuminates the improbable link between Arkansas votes and German gasoline consumption, inviting us to consider the convoluted dance of cause and effect in global socio-political and economic systems.

Doe and Jones (2018) laid the groundwork for contemplating the influence of political factors on transnational energy usage, little did they know that their groundwork would lead straight to the heart of American democracy and the autobahns of Germany. It's as if we've stepped into a J.K. Rowling novel, where geopolitical intrigue and fuel-related conundrums collide in a whimsical dance of statistical significance.

The high correlation coefficient and r-squared value affirm the robustness of the relationship, akin to discovering a synchronized swimming routine between unexpected partners. The p-value, with its cheeky wink of significance, further solidifies the unexpected nature of this connection, as if statistics itself has a mischievous side that revels in confounding our expectations.

In essence, our study not only strengthens the foundation laid by past research but also introduces a new chapter in the delightful saga of uncovering unexpected connections in our complex world. It's a reminder that scientific inquiry can lead us down charming, meandering paths filled with surprise twists and turns, much like a good mystery novel that keeps us on our toes. So, dear fellow researchers, let's embrace the unexpected and continue our whimsical exploration of the extraordinary tapestry of global interconnectedness. After all, who knows what other delightful curiosities await our inquisitive minds?

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.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 Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Arkansas and Gasoline pumped in Germany. 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]]
Fueling the Vote: A Surprising Correlation Between Democrat Votes in Arkansas and Gasoline Consumption in Germany

[[ABSTRACT]]
The relationship between political preferences and economic variables has intrigued scholars for decades. In this research, we investigate the improbable correlation between the number of votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Arkansas and the volume of gasoline pumped in Germany. Utilizing data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, we conducted a meticulous analysis covering the years 1991 to 2020. Surprisingly, our findings reveal a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9694081 and p < 0.01, indicating a striking connection between these seemingly disparate factors. This unexpected correlation demands further investigation and may have implications for understanding the global interconnectedness of socio-political and economic dynamics. While the idea of Arkansan votes influencing German gasoline consumption may sound far-fetched, the data speaks for itself, challenging conventional wisdom and beckoning for a closer examination of the intricate relationship between voting behaviors and international energy trends.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
Introduction
The intersection of politics and economics has long been a fertile ground for scholarly inquiry, yielding insights that are sometimes as surprising as finding a unicorn in a cornfield. In this study, we delve into the perplexing realm of political voting preferences and economic variables, aiming to unravel the mysterious connection between the number of votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Arkansas and the volume of gasoline guzzled in Germany. Yes, you read that right - we're venturing into the wild and wacky world where American politics seemingly meets European fuel consumption.
As any good researcher knows, a wild hypothesis and a dash of statistical analysis can lead to some eyebrow-raising discoveries. Armed with data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, we set out on a mission to determine if there's more to this peculiar pairing than meets the eye. Our quest has led us to uncover a correlation coefficient of 0.9694081 and a p-value of less than 0.01, signaling a relationship so strong, it's as if these variables were dancing a perfect tango in statistical harmony.
Now, the idea of Arkansas, a state known for its picturesque landscapes and mouthwatering barbecue, exerting any influence on the gasoline habits of our friends across the Atlantic might seem about as plausible as a unicorn giving a TED talk. But let us assure you, dear reader, that the numbers don't lie – they just sometimes have a penchant for wearing disguises and throwing surprise parties in the data.
This unexpected correlation has left us scratching our heads and rethinking what we thought we knew about the intricate dance between demographics, energy consumption, and the democratic process. It's as if the data has tapped us on the shoulder, whispered a riddle in our ears, and then vanished into the night, leaving us with a mystery begging to be solved.
So, buckle up and prepare for a journey through the twisty roads of statistical analysis, where even the most improbable connections can hold the keys to unlocking new understandings of our intertwined world. Let's unravel this curious conundrum and see where it leads us, armed with equal parts skepticism and scientific curiosity - because sometimes, in the world of research, truth really is stranger than fiction.

[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of the data collected from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration yielded some truly mind-boggling results. Upon careful examination, we discovered a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9694081 between the number of votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Arkansas and the volume of gasoline pumped in Germany. If that doesn't make you do a double-take, I don't know what will! This relationship is so strong, it's like finding out that peanut butter and jelly actually have a secret handshake behind closed doors.
Furthermore, the r-squared value of 0.9397521 indicates that a whopping 93.97521% of the variation in German gasoline consumption can be explained by the number of Democrat votes in Arkansas. It's as if these two variables were performing a well-rehearsed duet, leaving us wondering if there's a hidden dance-off happening on the international stage.
The p-value of less than 0.01 further solidifies the significance of this connection, as if statistics itself is winking at us and saying, "I told you there's more to this than meets the eye!"
To visualize this unexpected relationship, we present Fig. 1, a scatterplot that clearly depicts the strong correlation between the number of votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Arkansas and the volume of gasoline pumped in Germany. It's like seeing a penguin and a polar bear synchronized swimming – unexpected and yet undeniably captivating.
In conclusion, our findings reveal a fascinating and significant association between political voting patterns in the United States and energy consumption in Germany. This unlikely correlation challenges traditional assumptions and beckons researchers to explore the hidden threads that weave together seemingly disparate aspects of our global tapestry. It's an invitation to delve deeper into the uncharted territories of socio-political and economic interactions, armed with a healthy dose of skepticism and an unwavering commitment to unraveling the enigmatic connections that govern our world.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

Well, it's time to wrap up this wild ride through the land of statistical surprises and improbable connections. Who would've thought that votes in Arkansas could hold so much sway over gasoline pumps in Germany? It's like catching your uncle doing the Macarena at a family reunion – unexpected, slightly bewildering, and yet undeniably intriguing.

Our findings have not only raised eyebrows but also the question of what other unlikely duos might be out there, just waiting for a curious researcher to uncover. Maybe there's a connection between the number of donuts consumed in Boston and the average temperature in Fiji. Or perhaps there's a correlation between the length of the Queen's speeches and the sales of umbrellas in Seattle.

But fear not, fellow researchers, for our work here is done. We've danced through the data, untangled the mystery, and brought to light a connection that's as puzzling as it is fascinating. It's like discovering that two seemingly unrelated movies share the same universe – a real plot twist that leaves us hungry for more.

As for the implications of our findings, well, they're as elusive as that one sock that always goes missing in the laundry. But one thing's for sure: this unexpected correlation has left us all scratching our heads and rethinking the boundaries of possibility in the world of research.

So, as we bid adieu to this peculiar pairing of political votes and petrol pumps, let's raise a toast to the unexpected, the improbable, and the statistical head-scratchers that keep us all on our toes. And as for future research in this area? Let's just say, we've closed this chapter with a flourish, leaving no stone unturned and no data point unexamined. It's time to let this quirky connection take its place in the annals of statistical curiosities, where it will sit alongside other head-scratchers, such as the curious link between the sales of ice cream and the number of drownings.

So, as the curtain falls on this unlikely tale of political votes and petroleum, let's all agree that sometimes truth really is stranger than fiction, and statistical analysis is full of delightful surprises. And with that, we bid adieu and leave this peculiar pairing to take its place in the annals of Slightly-bonkers Scientific Discoveries. No more research needed here, folks – this unlikely duo has had its moment in the spotlight!

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 Fueling the Vote: A Surprising Correlation Between Democrat Votes in Arkansas and Gasoline Consumption in Germany. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Transcontinental Political Trends

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 Fueling the Vote: A Surprising Correlation Between Democrat Votes in Arkansas and Gasoline Consumption in Germany. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for Quirky Sociopolitical Research

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 Fueling the Vote: A Surprising Correlation Between Democrat Votes in Arkansas and Gasoline Consumption in Germany with an abstract of The relationship between political preferences and economic variables has intrigued scholars for decades. In this research, we investigate the improbable correlation between the number of votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Arkansas and the volume of gasoline pumped in Germany. Utilizing data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, we conducted a meticulous analysis covering the years 1991 to 2020. Surprisingly, our findings reveal a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9694081 and p < 0.01, indicating a striking connection between these seemingly disparate factors. This unexpected correlation demands further investigation and may have implications for understanding the global interconnectedness of socio-political and economic dynamics. While the idea of Arkansan votes influencing German gasoline consumption may sound far-fetched, the data speaks for itself, challenging conventional wisdom and beckoning for a closer examination of the intricate relationship between voting behaviors and international energy trends.

ChatGPT:

Democrat votes Arkansas, gasoline consumption Germany, correlation analysis, political preferences, economic variables, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, Energy Information Administration, global interconnectedness, socio-political dynamics, international energy trends

*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

Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Arkansas
Detailed data title: Percentage of all votes cast for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Arkansas
Source: MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse
See what else correlates with Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Arkansas

Gasoline pumped in Germany
Detailed data title: Volume of gasoline pumped consumed in Germany in millions of barrels per day
Source: Energy Information Administration
See what else correlates with Gasoline pumped in Germany

Correlation r = 0.9694081 (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 = 0.9397521 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 94% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Gasoline pumped in Germany) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Arkansas) over the 8 years from 1991 through 2020.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 7.0E-5.^Show 0.0000699423079815883000000000
The p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme.^Note More specifically the p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme if we had only tested one pair of variables one time.

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

Who is going to stop me? p-value reporting doesn't require me to report how many calculations I had to go through in order to find a low p-value!
On average, you will find a correaltion as strong as 0.97 in 0.007% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 14,297 random variables^Note Which I absolutely did.
with the same 7 degrees of freedom, ^Note Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 7 because we have two variables measured over a period of 8 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.

[ 0.84, 0.99 ] 95% correlation confidence interval (using the Fisher z-transformation)
^{Read more about the confidence interval} The confidence interval is an estimate the range of the value of the correlation coefficient, using the correlation itself as an input. The values are meant to be the low and high end of the correlation coefficient with 95% confidence.

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

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

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

	1992	1996	2000	2004	2008	2012	2016	2020
Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Arkansas (Percentage of votes)	53.208	53.7365	45.8643	44.5476	38.8647	36.879	33.6531	34.7751
Gasoline pumped in Germany (Million Barrels/Day)	725.642	698.992	665.055	578.038	482.568	426.817	421.066	456.117

Why this works

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

Try it yourself

You can calculate the values on this page on your own! Try running the Python code to see the calculation results. ^{Show the steps to do this.} Step 1: Download and install Python on your computer.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    return correlation, r_squared, p_value

# These are the arrays for the variables shown on this page, but you can modify them to be any two sets of numbers
array_1 = np.array([53.208,53.7365,45.8643,44.5476,38.8647,36.879,33.6531,34.7751,])
array_2 = np.array([725.642,698.992,665.055,578.038,482.568,426.817,421.066,456.117,])
array_1_name = "Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Arkansas"
array_2_name = "Gasoline pumped in Germany"

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

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

Reuseable content

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

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

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

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

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

Download images for these variables:

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

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

Alternatively you can use a tool like Inkscape.
High resolution line chart, optimized for mobile
Alternative high resolution line chart
Scatterplot
Portable line chart (png)
Portable line chart (png), optimized for mobile
Line chart for only Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Arkansas
Line chart for only Gasoline pumped in Germany
AI-generated correlation image
The spurious research paper: Fueling the Vote: A Surprising Correlation Between Democrat Votes in Arkansas and Gasoline Consumption in Germany

View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Cheers to you for rating this correlation!

Correlation ID: 4302 · Black Variable ID: 26058 · Red Variable ID: 24448


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