Spurious correlation #4,399 · 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 Republican Senators in Rhode Island and the second variable is Global Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns. The chart goes from 2005 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 Republican Senators in Rhode Island and the second variable is Global Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns. The chart goes from 2005 to 2020, and the two variables track closely in value over that time.

Download png, svg

AI explanation

As the number of Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island has increased, so has the quality of local clam chowder. This has led to a surge in productivity among nuclear reactor operators worldwide, and as a result, there has been a higher rate of adherence to safety protocols. This increased focus on safety has paved the way for a widespread, voluntary shutdown of permanent nuclear reactors, showcasing the unexpected impact of local political shifts on global nuclear policies. This all culminates in a domino effect of delicious diplomacy, where the state's political preferences are chowdering a path to a safer future, one nuclear reactor at a time. So, it seems that when it comes to influencing global nuclear reactor shutdowns, Rhode Island's Republican votes for Senators are the real powerhouse behind the sea change. Who would've thought that a state known for its scenic coastline could also hold the key to such a monumental meltdown of nuclear power. It just goes to show that in politics, as in chowder, the mix of ingredients can have far-reaching and unforeseen consequences.

^{Show image generation prompt} Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image depicting a serene coastal town in Rhode Island, with a TIME magazine cover style. Show a line of Republican voters peacefully casting their ballots at ballot boxes, with the aroma of savory clam chowder filling the air. Meanwhile, nuclear reactor operators around the world experience a wave of productivity, ensuring intense safety protocols and voluntary shutdowns. Portray a calm ocean, abundant clams, and the impact of local politics on global nuclear policies, symbolized by the simmering pot of chowder. 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: Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and Global Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns. 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 A TIME magazine cover image Celtic art An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie a funny image macro
ChatGPT: A TIME magazine cover image

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You describe simple visual scenes that depict the two variables stated. You combine both variables into one scene.
User prompt: Please describe a visual scene that prominently depicts both Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and Global Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns, in the following situation: As the number of Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island has increased, so has the quality of local clam chowder. This has led to a surge in productivity among nuclear reactor operators worldwide, and as a result, there has been a higher rate of adherence to safety protocols. This increased focus on safety has paved the way for a widespread, voluntary shutdown of permanent nuclear reactors, showcasing the unexpected impact of local political shifts on global nuclear policies. This all culminates in a domino effect of delicious diplomacy, where the state's political preferences are chowdering a path to a safer future, one nuclear reactor at a time. So, it seems that when it comes to influencing global nuclear reactor shutdowns, Rhode Island's Republican votes for Senators are the real powerhouse behind the sea change. Who would've thought that a state known for its scenic coastline could also hold the key to such a monumental meltdown of nuclear power. It just goes to show that in politics, as in chowder, the mix of ingredients can have far-reaching and unforeseen consequences.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a peaceful, coastal town in Rhode Island, Republican voters line up at ballot boxes as the smell of savory clam chowder wafts through the air. Suddenly, a wave of productivity hits local nuclear reactor operators worldwide. Intense safety protocols are being followed at every reactor, leading to voluntary shutdowns. The ocean is calm, and the clams are plentiful. The unexpected consequences of local politics on global nuclear policies are at play, creating a safer world, one simmering pot of chowder at a time.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You write and improve image generation prompts for DALLE-3. You maintain the same subjects, but enhance the visuals.
User prompt: Please respond with an image generation prompt that would be likely to create an interesting visual using DALLE-3, using the following style: [ A TIME magazine cover image ] and depicting this scene: In a peaceful, coastal town in Rhode Island, Republican voters line up at ballot boxes as the smell of savory clam chowder wafts through the air. Suddenly, a wave of productivity hits local nuclear reactor operators worldwide. Intense safety protocols are being followed at every reactor, leading to voluntary shutdowns. The ocean is calm, and the clams are plentiful. The unexpected consequences of local politics on global nuclear policies are at play, creating a safer world, one simmering pot of chowder at a time. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image depicting a serene coastal town in Rhode Island, with a TIME magazine cover style. Show a line of Republican voters peacefully casting their ballots at ballot boxes, with the aroma of savory clam chowder filling the air. Meanwhile, nuclear reactor operators around the world experience a wave of productivity, ensuring intense safety protocols and voluntary shutdowns. Portray a calm ocean, abundant clams, and the impact of local politics on global nuclear policies, symbolized by the simmering pot of chowder.

*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 increases in Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island positively influenced Global Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns.\Make it sound serious until the end.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.05)

Republican Votes for Rhode Island Scapegoat and Global Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns: A Statistical Conundrum

Journal of Political Paradoxes and Environmental Enigmas

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

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and Global Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns. 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. Perhaps you also got inspiration from some board games that are vaugely related.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Republican Votes for Rhode Island Scapegoat and Global Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns: A Statistical Conundrum

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper investigates the perplexing and seemingly unrelated phenomena of Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and Global Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns. Utilizing a combination of data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Statista, a correlation coefficient of 0.8794015 and p < 0.05 was found for the years 2005 to 2020. The findings suggest a striking link between the political preferences of Rhode Island residents and the international nuclear energy landscape. While the causation remains elusive, the evidence compels one to ponder whether the voting patterns in the Ocean State hold a mysterious influence on the fate of nuclear reactors worldwide. As scholarly minds grapple with this enigmatic relationship, the implications for both political and scientific realms are ripe for further investigation and perhaps a few chuckles along the way.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The correlation between political voting patterns and seemingly unrelated global phenomena has long intrigued scholars and armchair analysts alike. In the case of Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and the occurrence of Global Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns, the interplay between political decisions in an American state known for its diminutive size and the fate of nuclear reactors across the globe raises eyebrows and elicits a curious chuckle. Despite the initial incredulity, the statistical analysis in this study underscores a robust association, nudging researchers to grapple with the confounding mystery that lies beneath this seemingly inexplicable connection.
While the specifics of the mechanism linking these two disparate phenomena remain elusive, one is unable to stifle a wry grin at the prospect of unraveling this statistical conundrum. It is indeed a fascinating puzzle waiting to be deciphered, akin to stumbling upon an unexpected punchline in the dry and cryptic world of correlation studies. As we embark on this scholarly quest, it is imperative to approach the task with a blend of seriousness and lightheartedness, for the whimsical nature of this investigative pursuit is as palpable as the p-value that underpins our findings.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

Smith et al. (2017) analyzed the correlation between political voting patterns and global phenomena, setting the stage for investigations into seemingly improbable connections. Doe and Jones (2019) delved into the intricate interplay between state-level political decisions and their repercussions on the international stage, opening the door to unconventional and perplexing paradigms for scholarly exploration.

In "Nuclear Politics: The History of Energy in the 21st Century" by Anderson (2015), the discussion of political maneuverings surrounding nuclear energy provides a fertile backdrop for contemplating the unforeseen influence of Rhode Island's political landscape on nuclear reactor shutdowns worldwide. Similarly, "The Ocean State: A Political History" by Smith (2018) offers insights into the idiosyncrasies of Rhode Island's political climate, prompting a contemplation of the state's potential ripple effect on global affairs.

On a tangential note, works of fiction such as "Rhode Island Reckoning" by Harper (2020) and "Nuclear Nights" by Greene (2016) may not provide scholarly insights, but their subtle nods to political intrigue and nuclear themes evoke a whimsical sense of serendipity in light of our research topic. In a similar vein, the board game "Power Grid" by Friedemann Friese fosters a playful contemplation of energy management and strategic decision-making, offering a lighthearted perspective on the underlying dynamics of geopolitical intricacies and their potential repercussions on nuclear energy.

While these sources delve into the serious aspects of the political and energy landscapes, they serve as subtle nods to the delightful and unexpected avenues of inquiry that present themselves amid the scholarly pursuit of unraveling the confounding link between Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and Global Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns.

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

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and Global Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and Statista . You used data from 2005 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]]
Republican Votes for Rhode Island Scapegoat and Global Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns: A Statistical Conundrum

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper investigates the perplexing and seemingly unrelated phenomena of Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and Global Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns. Utilizing a combination of data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Statista, a correlation coefficient of 0.8794015 and p < 0.05 was found for the years 2005 to 2020. The findings suggest a striking link between the political preferences of Rhode Island residents and the international nuclear energy landscape. While the causation remains elusive, the evidence compels one to ponder whether the voting patterns in the Ocean State hold a mysterious influence on the fate of nuclear reactors worldwide. As scholarly minds grapple with this enigmatic relationship, the implications for both political and scientific realms are ripe for further investigation and perhaps a few chuckles along the way.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
The correlation between political voting patterns and seemingly unrelated global phenomena has long intrigued scholars and armchair analysts alike. In the case of Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and the occurrence of Global Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns, the interplay between political decisions in an American state known for its diminutive size and the fate of nuclear reactors across the globe raises eyebrows and elicits a curious chuckle. Despite the initial incredulity, the statistical analysis in this study underscores a robust association, nudging researchers to grapple with the confounding mystery that lies beneath this seemingly inexplicable connection.
While the specifics of the mechanism linking these two disparate phenomena remain elusive, one is unable to stifle a wry grin at the prospect of unraveling this statistical conundrum. It is indeed a fascinating puzzle waiting to be deciphered, akin to stumbling upon an unexpected punchline in the dry and cryptic world of correlation studies. As we embark on this scholarly quest, it is imperative to approach the task with a blend of seriousness and lightheartedness, for the whimsical nature of this investigative pursuit is as palpable as the p-value that underpins our findings.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

Data Collection:
For this study, data on Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and Global Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns were collected from a variety of sources, including the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Statista. The years 2005 to 2020 were chosen as the time frame for the analysis, encompassing a period rife with political intrigue and nuclear reactor musings.

A convoluted yet oddly effective approach was employed to gather the data, akin to untangling a knot of statistical yarn. Various keywords and search queries were diligently inputted into search engines, leading the research team down the rabbit hole of online databases, election archives, and perhaps a few amusing cat videos. This haphazard yet meticulous process yielded a rich harvest of data, punctuated by the occasional distraction in the form of a "hot take" on the latest political scandal or reactor shutdown.

Data Analysis:
To boggle the mind and confound the senses, the gathered data underwent rigorous statistical scrutiny. Correlation coefficients were calculated, leaving no stone unturned in the quest to unravel the cryptic relationship between Republican votes in the smallest state in the union and the far-reaching ripple effects on nuclear reactor operations across the globe.

The statistical software utilized for this analysis was as dependable as a trusty lab assistant, capable of crunching numbers and producing p-values with the efficiency of a well-oiled machine. Through a series of complex arithmetic operations and matrix manipulations, the data revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.8794015, eliciting a knowing nod from the researchers and prompting an appreciative whistle at the robustness of the association. Moreover, the p-value was found to be less than 0.05, a discovery that raised the collective eyebrow of the research team and set the stage for a raising of the stakes in this statistical saga.

Adjustments for Confounding Variables:
In the murky waters of statistical analysis, the specter of confounding variables looms large, threatening to muddy the clear waters of association and causation. To mitigate this risk, the research team engaged in a game of hypotheticals and counterfactuals, considering various factors that could potentially confound the observed relationship between Republican votes in Rhode Island and the fate of nuclear reactors worldwide.

The process of controlling for confounding variables involved an intricate dance of statistical adjustments, resembling a delicate waltz between the measured variables and the potential hidden influences lurking in the shadows of the dataset. As the team navigated the labyrinth of hypothetical scenarios and alternative explanations, the air was thick with the tension of unmasking the true nature of the relationship, much like the climax of a thrilling detective novel.

Ethical Considerations:
In the pursuit of scholarly inquiry, the research team remained ever cognizant of the ethical dimensions inherent in the manipulation and interpretation of data. As guardians of academic integrity, the researchers upheld the principles of transparency and rigor, ensuring that the data were handled with the care and respect befitting their role in uncovering the enigmatic bond between political voting patterns and global nuclear reactor phenomena.

The meticulous adherence to ethical standards in this study reflects the unwavering commitment of the research team to the pursuit of knowledge, tempered by an appreciation for the whimsical nature of statistical puzzles and the occasional humorous aside that permeates the academic landscape.

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

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and Global Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Limit your response to 500 tokens.

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

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

[[TITLE]]
Republican Votes for Rhode Island Scapegoat and Global Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns: A Statistical Conundrum

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper investigates the perplexing and seemingly unrelated phenomena of Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and Global Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns. Utilizing a combination of data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Statista, a correlation coefficient of 0.8794015 and p < 0.05 was found for the years 2005 to 2020. The findings suggest a striking link between the political preferences of Rhode Island residents and the international nuclear energy landscape. While the causation remains elusive, the evidence compels one to ponder whether the voting patterns in the Ocean State hold a mysterious influence on the fate of nuclear reactors worldwide. As scholarly minds grapple with this enigmatic relationship, the implications for both political and scientific realms are ripe for further investigation and perhaps a few chuckles along the way.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
Smith et al. (2017) analyzed the correlation between political voting patterns and global phenomena, setting the stage for investigations into seemingly improbable connections. Doe and Jones (2019) delved into the intricate interplay between state-level political decisions and their repercussions on the international stage, opening the door to unconventional and perplexing paradigms for scholarly exploration.
In "Nuclear Politics: The History of Energy in the 21st Century" by Anderson (2015), the discussion of political maneuverings surrounding nuclear energy provides a fertile backdrop for contemplating the unforeseen influence of Rhode Island's political landscape on nuclear reactor shutdowns worldwide. Similarly, "The Ocean State: A Political History" by Smith (2018) offers insights into the idiosyncrasies of Rhode Island's political climate, prompting a contemplation of the state's potential ripple effect on global affairs.
On a tangential note, works of fiction such as "Rhode Island Reckoning" by Harper (2020) and "Nuclear Nights" by Greene (2016) may not provide scholarly insights, but their subtle nods to political intrigue and nuclear themes evoke a whimsical sense of serendipity in light of our research topic. In a similar vein, the board game "Power Grid" by Friedemann Friese fosters a playful contemplation of energy management and strategic decision-making, offering a lighthearted perspective on the underlying dynamics of geopolitical intricacies and their potential repercussions on nuclear energy.
While these sources delve into the serious aspects of the political and energy landscapes, they serve as subtle nods to the delightful and unexpected avenues of inquiry that present themselves amid the scholarly pursuit of unraveling the confounding link between Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and Global Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns.

[[RESULTS]]
The statistical analysis conducted on the data collected from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Statista revealed a striking correlation between Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and Global Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns. For the time period spanning from 2005 to 2020, a correlation coefficient of 0.8794015 was observed, with an r-squared value of 0.7733470 and a p-value less than 0.05. These results suggest a robust and statistically significant relationship between these two seemingly disparate variables.
Figure 1 displays a scatterplot illustrating the strong correlation between the frequency of Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and the incidence of Global Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns. The unmistakable pattern depicted in the scatterplot underscores the strength of the association between these variables, thus prompting further investigation into the underlying mechanisms at play.
The findings of this study raise intriguing questions about the potential influence of political preferences in Rhode Island on the global nuclear energy landscape. While the direction of causation remains elusive, the compelling statistical evidence invites a playful exploration of the bizarre and enigmatic relationship between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. Further research endeavors may shed light on this perplexing conundrum, and perhaps evoke a lighthearted chuckle or two along the way.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The results of this study provide compelling evidence in support of the prior research that has hinted at a tantalizing connection between Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and Global Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns. Building upon the foundations laid by Smith et al. (2017) and Doe and Jones (2019), our findings underscore the robustness of the correlation between these seemingly disparate phenomena. The statistical analysis yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.8794015 and a p-value less than 0.05, further bolstering the notion that there is indeed something peculiar afoot.

Delving into the delightful world of literature and pop culture, we recall the subtle yet thought-provoking references made in "Rhode Island Reckoning" by Harper (2020) and "Nuclear Nights" by Greene (2016), which, in light of our research findings, take on a surprisingly prescient air. These works, though not academic in nature, seem to hint at a peculiar synergy between political intrigue and nuclear themes. And who could forget the game "Power Grid," which, as we playfully pondered in our literature review, offers a lighthearted perspective on the underlying dynamics of geopolitical intricacies and their potential repercussions on nuclear energy? The unexpected relevance of these seemingly tangential sources adds a whimsical layer to our serious scholarly pursuits.

The findings of this study, while undeniably puzzling, not only validate the prior research that has paved the way for this investigation but also raise intriguing questions about the underlying mechanisms at play. The enigmatic relationship between Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and Global Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns, while certainly confounding, beckons for further exploration and, dare we say, perhaps a touch of levity amidst the scholarly contemplation of this befuddling conundrum.

In conclusion, this study has illuminated a truly curious correlation that warrants additional investigation. The implications for both the political and scientific realms are as perplexing as they are ripe for further scrutiny. As we remain poised on the precipice of unraveling this curious enigma, let us approach the pursuit of knowledge with a merry spirit and a willingness to entertain the unexpected.

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

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and Global Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
Republican Votes for Rhode Island Scapegoat and Global Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns: A Statistical Conundrum

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper investigates the perplexing and seemingly unrelated phenomena of Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and Global Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns. Utilizing a combination of data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Statista, a correlation coefficient of 0.8794015 and p < 0.05 was found for the years 2005 to 2020. The findings suggest a striking link between the political preferences of Rhode Island residents and the international nuclear energy landscape. While the causation remains elusive, the evidence compels one to ponder whether the voting patterns in the Ocean State hold a mysterious influence on the fate of nuclear reactors worldwide. As scholarly minds grapple with this enigmatic relationship, the implications for both political and scientific realms are ripe for further investigation and perhaps a few chuckles along the way.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
The correlation between political voting patterns and seemingly unrelated global phenomena has long intrigued scholars and armchair analysts alike. In the case of Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and the occurrence of Global Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns, the interplay between political decisions in an American state known for its diminutive size and the fate of nuclear reactors across the globe raises eyebrows and elicits a curious chuckle. Despite the initial incredulity, the statistical analysis in this study underscores a robust association, nudging researchers to grapple with the confounding mystery that lies beneath this seemingly inexplicable connection.
While the specifics of the mechanism linking these two disparate phenomena remain elusive, one is unable to stifle a wry grin at the prospect of unraveling this statistical conundrum. It is indeed a fascinating puzzle waiting to be deciphered, akin to stumbling upon an unexpected punchline in the dry and cryptic world of correlation studies. As we embark on this scholarly quest, it is imperative to approach the task with a blend of seriousness and lightheartedness, for the whimsical nature of this investigative pursuit is as palpable as the p-value that underpins our findings.

[[RESULTS]]
The statistical analysis conducted on the data collected from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Statista revealed a striking correlation between Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and Global Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns. For the time period spanning from 2005 to 2020, a correlation coefficient of 0.8794015 was observed, with an r-squared value of 0.7733470 and a p-value less than 0.05. These results suggest a robust and statistically significant relationship between these two seemingly disparate variables.
Figure 1 displays a scatterplot illustrating the strong correlation between the frequency of Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and the incidence of Global Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns. The unmistakable pattern depicted in the scatterplot underscores the strength of the association between these variables, thus prompting further investigation into the underlying mechanisms at play.
The findings of this study raise intriguing questions about the potential influence of political preferences in Rhode Island on the global nuclear energy landscape. While the direction of causation remains elusive, the compelling statistical evidence invites a playful exploration of the bizarre and enigmatic relationship between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. Further research endeavors may shed light on this perplexing conundrum, and perhaps evoke a lighthearted chuckle or two along the way.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, the findings of this study unveil a notably robust and statistically significant correlation between Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and the global occurrence of Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns. The data, with a correlation coefficient of 0.8794015 and a p-value less than 0.05, defies the conventional wisdom that Rhode Island's political influence is as diminutive as its geographical size. Yet, the veritable hand-in-glove fit between these variables challenges researchers to fight the urge to raise an eyebrow, or stifle a wry chuckle, when pondering the implications.

While we refrain from boldly asserting causation, the evidence certainly sparks a playful nugget of curiosity about the potential influence of Ocean State politics on the international nuclear energy landscape. The scatterplot illustrates this tantalizing correlation, beckoning forth a plethora of puns about "nuclear reactions" in the voting booths. Nevertheless, the ultimate direction of causation remains as elusive as a politician's promises before an election.

The interplay between Rhode Island's political decisions and the fate of nuclear reactors across the globe may leave many scratching their heads. It is a perplexing puzzle equivalent to stumbling upon a veiled punchline in the cryptic world of correlation studies. As such, we must approach this scholarly quest with a magnifying glass in one hand and a jocular quip on the tip of our tongues.

In essence, this investigation underscores the need for further scholarly exploration of this enigmatic relationship. Subsequent studies may peel back the layers of this captivating onion and perhaps reveal a kernel of truth that will quench the thirst for understanding and perhaps elicit a few hearty guffaws along the way. Yet, in the end, we assert that future research in this area is as unnecessary as a nuclear reactor shutdown in a sunny state.

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 Republican Votes for Rhode Island Scapegoat and Global Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns: A Statistical Conundrum. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

Journal of Political Paradoxes and Environmental Enigmas

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 Republican Votes for Rhode Island Scapegoat and Global Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns: A Statistical Conundrum. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Institute for Interdisciplinary Nuclear Research Solutions (IINRS)

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 Republican Votes for Rhode Island Scapegoat and Global Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns: A Statistical Conundrum with an abstract of This paper investigates the perplexing and seemingly unrelated phenomena of Republican votes for Senators in Rhode Island and Global Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns. Utilizing a combination of data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Statista, a correlation coefficient of 0.8794015 and p < 0.05 was found for the years 2005 to 2020. The findings suggest a striking link between the political preferences of Rhode Island residents and the international nuclear energy landscape. While the causation remains elusive, the evidence compels one to ponder whether the voting patterns in the Ocean State hold a mysterious influence on the fate of nuclear reactors worldwide. As scholarly minds grapple with this enigmatic relationship, the implications for both political and scientific realms are ripe for further investigation and perhaps a few chuckles along the way.

ChatGPT:

Republican votes, Rhode Island, global, permanent nuclear reactor shutdowns, statistical analysis, correlation coefficient, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, Statista, political preferences, international nuclear energy landscape, causation, voting patterns, Ocean State, nuclear reactors, political implications, scientific implications

*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 Republican Senators in Rhode Island
Detailed data title: Total number of votes cast for Federal Republican Senate candidates in Rhode Island
Source: MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse
See what else correlates with Votes for Republican Senators in Rhode Island

Global Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns
Source: Statista
See what else correlates with Global Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns

Correlation r = 0.8794015 (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 = 0.7733470 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 77.3% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Global Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Votes for Republican Senators in Rhode Island) over the 6 years from 2005 through 2020.

p < 0.05, which statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.0209.^Show 0.0209390137657297050000000000
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 0.88 in 2.09% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 48 random variables^Note Which I absolutely did.
with the same 5 degrees of freedom, ^Note Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 5 because we have two variables measured over a period of 6 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.

[ 0.24, 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.

	2006	2008	2012	2014	2018	2020
Votes for Republican Senators in Rhode Island (Total votes)	178950	116174	146222	92684	144421	164855
Global Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns (Shutdowns)	8	2	3	1	7	6

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.
Y-axis doesn't start at zero: I truncated the Y-axes of the graph above. I also used a line graph, which makes the visual connection stand out more than it deserves. ^Note Nothing against line graphs. They are great at telling a story when you have linear data! But visually it is deceptive because the only data is at the points on the graph, not the lines on the graph. In between each point, the data could have been doing anything. Like going for a random walk by itself!
Mathematically what I showed is true, but it is intentionally misleading. Below is the same chart but with both Y-axes starting at zero.

Try it yourself

You can calculate the values on this page on your own! Try running the Python code to see the calculation results. ^{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([178950,116174,146222,92684,144421,164855,])
array_2 = np.array([8,2,3,1,7,6,])
array_1_name = "Votes for Republican Senators in Rhode Island"
array_2_name = "Global Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns"

# 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 Republican Senators in Rhode Island
Line chart for only Global Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns
AI-generated correlation image
The spurious research paper: Republican Votes for Rhode Island Scapegoat and Global Permanent Nuclear Reactor Shutdowns: A Statistical Conundrum

View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

I'm genuinely thankful for your rating!

Correlation ID: 4399 · Black Variable ID: 26309 · Red Variable ID: 308


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