Download png, svg
AI explanation
As Libertarian votes for Senators in Arizona increase, there is a corresponding rise in the production of inflatable cacti. These cacti, being a popular symbol of the Wild West, are in high demand for Western-themed parties in Libya. This surge in demand for inflatable cacti leads to a boom in the kerosene-powered air pumps industry in Libya, ultimately resulting in a noticeable increase in the consumption of kerosene in the country. It's a truly unexpected ripple effect of political shifts!
Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Create an image of a vast Arizona desert landscape, where inflatable cacti, larger than life, line the horizon as if they were real towering cacti. People in Western attire are seen setting up Western-themed party decor in the foreground, with inflatable cacti being the center of attention. Carry the scene to Libya, where similar inflatable cacti are being set up for a party. Furthermore, include kerosene-powered air pumps in the background of the Libyan scene, hinting at the surge in kerosene consumption due to the booming demand for the inflatable cacti. 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: Libertarian votes for Senators in Arizona and Kerosene used in Libya. 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: Oragami Psychedelic a funny image macro a meme Realistic
ChatGPT: Realistic
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 Libertarian votes for Senators in Arizona and Kerosene used in Libya, in the following situation: As Libertarian votes for Senators in Arizona increase, there is a corresponding rise in the production of inflatable cacti. These cacti, being a popular symbol of the Wild West, are in high demand for Western-themed parties in Libya. This surge in demand for inflatable cacti leads to a boom in the kerosene-powered air pumps industry in Libya, ultimately resulting in a noticeable increase in the consumption of kerosene in the country. It's a truly unexpected ripple effect of political shifts!. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In Arizona, as Libertarian votes for Senators increase, the production of inflatable cacti surges. These cacti, popular for Western-themed parties, are in high demand in Libya. This spike in demand leads to a boom in the kerosene-powered air pumps industry in Libya, boosting the consumption of kerosene in the country.
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: [ Realistic ] and depicting this scene: In Arizona, as Libertarian votes for Senators increase, the production of inflatable cacti surges. These cacti, popular for Western-themed parties, are in high demand in Libya. This spike in demand leads to a boom in the kerosene-powered air pumps industry in Libya, boosting the consumption of kerosene in the country. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Create an image of a vast Arizona desert landscape, where inflatable cacti, larger than life, line the horizon as if they were real towering cacti. People in Western attire are seen setting up Western-themed party decor in the foreground, with inflatable cacti being the center of attention. Carry the scene to Libya, where similar inflatable cacti are being set up for a party. Furthermore, include kerosene-powered air pumps in the background of the Libyan scene, hinting at the surge in kerosene consumption due to the booming demand for the inflatable cacti.
*Variations in the User Prompts from chart to chart are just the result of random number generation in Python. I wrote a few arrays of various styles and methods to ask questions to change up the results. Every time this site writes an explanation or generates an image, the script picks from each at random.
I sequence the requests into multiple prompts because I find GPT 3.5 to perform much better with short, well-managed contexts. Thus, I track the context directly in Python and only ask ChatGPT targeted questions.
System prompt: You provide humorous responses in the form of plausible sounding explanations for correlations. You assume the correlation is causative for the purpose of the explanation even if it is ridiculous. You do not chat with the user, you only reply with the causal connection explanation and nothing else.
User prompt: Please make up a funny explanation for how increases in Libertarian votes for Senators in Arizona positively influenced Kerosene used in Libya.
AI academic paper
 |
Fueling Political Fire: Examining the Flammable Relationship between Libertarian Votes in Arizona and Kerosene Consumption in Libya The Journal of Cross-Cultural Combustion Studies Jan 2024 Reminder: This paper is AI-generated. Not real! |
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You write titles and abstracts of goofy academic research papers.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, and add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Libertarian votes for Senators in Arizona and Kerosene used in Libya. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.
Include a pun in the title.
Your research team used data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and Energy Information Administration to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.8682488 and p < 0.01 for 1980 to 2020.
Please respond in this format (replace "Lorem ipsum dolor sit" with your title and abstract)
[[TITLE]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit
[[ABSTRACT]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit
ChatGPT:
[[TITLE]]
"Fueling Political Fire: Examining the Flammable Relationship between Libertarian Votes in Arizona and Kerosene Consumption in Libya"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the curious connection between Libertarian votes for Senators in Arizona and kerosene consumption in Libya. Drawing on extensive data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, our research team has uncovered a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.8682488, with a statistical significance denoted by p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 1980 to 2020. While this relationship may seem to ignite skepticism, our findings shed light on the potential interplay between seemingly unrelated political and energy dynamics. Our study offers an illuminating perspective, blending political science and energy economics, while subtly suggesting that perhaps, at times, political waves can be influenced by the fiery consumption of kerosene abroad.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft the introduction section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Libertarian votes for Senators in Arizona and Kerosene used in Libya. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.
Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Fueling Political Fire: Examining the Flammable Relationship between Libertarian Votes in Arizona and Kerosene Consumption in Libya"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the curious connection between Libertarian votes for Senators in Arizona and kerosene consumption in Libya. Drawing on extensive data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, our research team has uncovered a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.8682488, with a statistical significance denoted by p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 1980 to 2020. While this relationship may seem to ignite skepticism, our findings shed light on the potential interplay between seemingly unrelated political and energy dynamics. Our study offers an illuminating perspective, blending political science and energy economics, while subtly suggesting that perhaps, at times, political waves can be influenced by the fiery consumption of kerosene abroad.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The intersection of political ideology and global energy dynamics has long captivated researchers seeking to understand the seemingly disparate forces that shape our world. In this study, we embark on a rigorous exploration of the remarkable relationship between Libertarian votes for Senators in Arizona and kerosene consumption in Libya. While this connection may initially seem as elusive as a mirage in the desert, our analysis yields compelling evidence of a correlation that is as striking as a camel in a haystack.
As we navigate through the labyrinth of data from various sources, such as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab and the Energy Information Administration, we are met with a web of statistics and mathematical nuances. Our quest begins with a critical examination of the available empirical evidence spanning over four decades, daring to uncover the threads that link the seemingly incongruent patterns of political choice and kerosene vitality.
The relationship between political ideology and energy consumption is as complex as deciphering hieroglyphics in a sandstorm. And yet, as we delve deeper into the enigmatic terrain of libertarian sentiments and kerosene expenditure, our findings begin to paint a picture as vivid as a desert sunset. The allure of our investigation lies in its potential to unravel the unexpected, to highlight the overlooked, and to challenge the conventions of scholarly inquiry. After all, who would have thought that the ballot box in Arizona and the kerosene lamp in Libya could dance to the same tune of statistical significance?
As we embark on this scholarly escapade, we invite our readers to peer through the lens of statistics and logic, but also to embrace the spirit of curiosity that fuels the engines of discovery. With a wink to the quirkiness of the interconnected world we inhabit, we set out to illuminate the underexplored intersection of political preference and energy vitality, seeking to ignite conversations as incendiary as a political debate in the desert.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics 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 Libertarian votes for Senators in Arizona and Kerosene used in Libya. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.
Speak in the present tense for this section (the authors find...), as is common in academic research paper literature reviews. Name the sources in a format similar to this: In "Book," the authors find lorem and ipsum.
Make up the lorem and ipsum part, but make it sound related to the topic at hand.
Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then name some movies that you watched that are tangentially related to the topic.
Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Fueling Political Fire: Examining the Flammable Relationship between Libertarian Votes in Arizona and Kerosene Consumption in Libya"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the curious connection between Libertarian votes for Senators in Arizona and kerosene consumption in Libya. Drawing on extensive data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, our research team has uncovered a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.8682488, with a statistical significance denoted by p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 1980 to 2020. While this relationship may seem to ignite skepticism, our findings shed light on the potential interplay between seemingly unrelated political and energy dynamics. Our study offers an illuminating perspective, blending political science and energy economics, while subtly suggesting that perhaps, at times, political waves can be influenced by the fiery consumption of kerosene abroad.
-------
And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The intersection of political ideology and global energy dynamics has long captivated researchers seeking to understand the seemingly disparate forces that shape our world. In this study, we embark on a rigorous exploration of the remarkable relationship between Libertarian votes for Senators in Arizona and kerosene consumption in Libya. While this connection may initially seem as elusive as a mirage in the desert, our analysis yields compelling evidence of a correlation that is as striking as a camel in a haystack.
As we navigate through the labyrinth of data from various sources, such as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab and the Energy Information Administration, we are met with a web of statistics and mathematical nuances. Our quest begins with a critical examination of the available empirical evidence spanning over four decades, daring to uncover the threads that link the seemingly incongruent patterns of political choice and kerosene vitality.
The relationship between political ideology and energy consumption is as complex as deciphering hieroglyphics in a sandstorm. And yet, as we delve deeper into the enigmatic terrain of libertarian sentiments and kerosene expenditure, our findings begin to paint a picture as vivid as a desert sunset. The allure of our investigation lies in its potential to unravel the unexpected, to highlight the overlooked, and to challenge the conventions of scholarly inquiry. After all, who would have thought that the ballot box in Arizona and the kerosene lamp in Libya could dance to the same tune of statistical significance?
As we embark on this scholarly escapade, we invite our readers to peer through the lens of statistics and logic, but also to embrace the spirit of curiosity that fuels the engines of discovery. With a wink to the quirkiness of the interconnected world we inhabit, we set out to illuminate the underexplored intersection of political preference and energy vitality, seeking to ignite conversations as incendiary as a political debate in the desert.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
In the pursuit of uncovering the confluence of libertarian votes in Arizona and kerosene utilization in Libya, our investigation commences with an analysis of existing literature. A comprehensive review of related studies reveals a tapestry of scholarly inquiries, ranging from socioeconomic analyses to geopolitical examinations.
Smith, in "Political Ideologies and Energy Landscapes," posits a compelling theory regarding the ideological underpinnings shaping energy consumption patterns. Meanwhile, Doe, in "Energy Economics and Electoral Dynamics," elaborates on the interplay between political preferences and fuel usage, offering a nuanced perspective on the potential linkages between seemingly disparate domains. Furthermore, Jones, in "Libertarian Leanings and Global Fuel Fluctuations," catalyzes our contemplation of the multifaceted influences that permeate the global energy arena.
Beyond these works, broader explorations into the realm of energy economics and political behavior have also piqued our interest. "The Energy Paradox: Unraveling the Mysteries of Fuel and Freedom" by Sands and "The Libertarian Manifesto: A Political and Economic Odyssey" by Canyon serve as poignant reminders of the intricate interdependencies embedded within energy landscapes and political ideologies.
Turning to more unconventional sources, the fiction works "Desert Dreams: A Political Tale" by Mirage and "Kerosene Chronicles: A Combustible Conversation" by Blaze offer a creative detour into the realm of literary imagination, where the flames of political fervor intertwine with the luminosity of energy prospects. Meanwhile, cinematic portrayals in movies such as "Arizona Heatwave" and "Libyan Lanterns" offer anecdotal glimpses into the contextual intricacies of our research domain, albeit with a touch of dramatic flair and celluloid innovation.
As our review sets the stage for the subsequent analyses, this amalgamation of scholarship, fiction, and cinematic interpretation serves as both a scaffold and a springboard for our uniquely multifaceted approach to understanding the enigmatic entanglement of libertarian votes in Arizona and kerosene utilization in Libya. Through this eclectic lens, we invite our readers to embark on a journey that is as illuminating as the flickering flame of a kerosene lamp and as unpredictable as the ever-shifting sands of political preference.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics 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 Libertarian votes for Senators in Arizona and Kerosene used in Libya. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.
Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and Energy Information Administration . You used data from 1980 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 Political Fire: Examining the Flammable Relationship between Libertarian Votes in Arizona and Kerosene Consumption in Libya"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the curious connection between Libertarian votes for Senators in Arizona and kerosene consumption in Libya. Drawing on extensive data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, our research team has uncovered a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.8682488, with a statistical significance denoted by p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 1980 to 2020. While this relationship may seem to ignite skepticism, our findings shed light on the potential interplay between seemingly unrelated political and energy dynamics. Our study offers an illuminating perspective, blending political science and energy economics, while subtly suggesting that perhaps, at times, political waves can be influenced by the fiery consumption of kerosene abroad.
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The intersection of political ideology and global energy dynamics has long captivated researchers seeking to understand the seemingly disparate forces that shape our world. In this study, we embark on a rigorous exploration of the remarkable relationship between Libertarian votes for Senators in Arizona and kerosene consumption in Libya. While this connection may initially seem as elusive as a mirage in the desert, our analysis yields compelling evidence of a correlation that is as striking as a camel in a haystack.
As we navigate through the labyrinth of data from various sources, such as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab and the Energy Information Administration, we are met with a web of statistics and mathematical nuances. Our quest begins with a critical examination of the available empirical evidence spanning over four decades, daring to uncover the threads that link the seemingly incongruent patterns of political choice and kerosene vitality.
The relationship between political ideology and energy consumption is as complex as deciphering hieroglyphics in a sandstorm. And yet, as we delve deeper into the enigmatic terrain of libertarian sentiments and kerosene expenditure, our findings begin to paint a picture as vivid as a desert sunset. The allure of our investigation lies in its potential to unravel the unexpected, to highlight the overlooked, and to challenge the conventions of scholarly inquiry. After all, who would have thought that the ballot box in Arizona and the kerosene lamp in Libya could dance to the same tune of statistical significance?
As we embark on this scholarly escapade, we invite our readers to peer through the lens of statistics and logic, but also to embrace the spirit of curiosity that fuels the engines of discovery. With a wink to the quirkiness of the interconnected world we inhabit, we set out to illuminate the underexplored intersection of political preference and energy vitality, seeking to ignite conversations as incendiary as a political debate in the desert.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
ChatGPT:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
In order to unravel the enigmatic relationship between Libertarian votes for Senators in Arizona and kerosene consumption in Libya, our research team embarked on a data odyssey that would make Odysseus himself envious. We gathered data from 1980 to 2020, utilizing information from a variety of sources, including the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration. As we shrewdly navigated the vast expanses of the internet and wrangled with copious spreadsheets, we sought to tease out the correlations that lay hidden amidst the alphanumeric wilderness.
Our methodology entailed a meticulous process of data collection, collation, and validation, resembling a sleuth's pursuit of clues in an Agatha Christie novel. We employed advanced statistical techniques and models that were as nimble and agile as a gazelle in the Sahara, striding through the intricacies of multivariate analysis and time series modeling. The data underwent rigorous scrutiny and vetting, akin to the discerning eye of a connoisseur selecting the finest wines at a tasting event, ensuring that only the most robust and reliable data points were included in our analysis.
In our quest to understand the intersection of political choice and energy consumption, we ventured into the realm of econometric wizardry, constructing models with more layers than an onion and more parameters than a Swiss watch. Through the application of dynamic panel data analysis and cross-country regression approaches, we endeavored to capture the essence of the intricate dance between libertarian sentiments and kerosene utilization. Each regression coefficient and standard error was scrutinized with a precision reminiscent of a diamond cutter, as we sought to distill the essence of causality from the noisy cacophony of variables.
While our methodology may sound as complex as a physics equation, we do not discount the role of serendipity in our scholarly pursuits. Much like stumbling upon an oasis in the desert, our methodology also welcomed unexpected insights, observations, and the occasional eureka moment that defied the confines of traditional statistical frameworks. After all, in the vast expanse of research, it is often the unscripted detours that lead to the most intriguing discoveries.
In the pursuit of knowledge, we acknowledged the limitations inherent in our chosen methodological approach. While statistics can illuminate the terrain, there are bound to be crevices and caverns that remain unexplored. Nonetheless, armed with the resilience of rigorous inquiry and the audacity of academic curiosity, we ventured forth into the labyrinthine nexus of political fire and kerosene vitality, seeking to illuminate the pathways that bind the seemingly divergent landscapes of political choice and energy consumption.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.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 Libertarian votes for Senators in Arizona and Kerosene used in Libya. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.
Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and Energy Information Administration .
For the time period 1980 to 2020, you found a correlation 0.8682488, r-squared of 0.7538559, 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 Political Fire: Examining the Flammable Relationship between Libertarian Votes in Arizona and Kerosene Consumption in Libya"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the curious connection between Libertarian votes for Senators in Arizona and kerosene consumption in Libya. Drawing on extensive data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, our research team has uncovered a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.8682488, with a statistical significance denoted by p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 1980 to 2020. While this relationship may seem to ignite skepticism, our findings shed light on the potential interplay between seemingly unrelated political and energy dynamics. Our study offers an illuminating perspective, blending political science and energy economics, while subtly suggesting that perhaps, at times, political waves can be influenced by the fiery consumption of kerosene abroad.
-------
And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
The intersection of political ideology and global energy dynamics has long captivated researchers seeking to understand the seemingly disparate forces that shape our world. In this study, we embark on a rigorous exploration of the remarkable relationship between Libertarian votes for Senators in Arizona and kerosene consumption in Libya. While this connection may initially seem as elusive as a mirage in the desert, our analysis yields compelling evidence of a correlation that is as striking as a camel in a haystack.
As we navigate through the labyrinth of data from various sources, such as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab and the Energy Information Administration, we are met with a web of statistics and mathematical nuances. Our quest begins with a critical examination of the available empirical evidence spanning over four decades, daring to uncover the threads that link the seemingly incongruent patterns of political choice and kerosene vitality.
The relationship between political ideology and energy consumption is as complex as deciphering hieroglyphics in a sandstorm. And yet, as we delve deeper into the enigmatic terrain of libertarian sentiments and kerosene expenditure, our findings begin to paint a picture as vivid as a desert sunset. The allure of our investigation lies in its potential to unravel the unexpected, to highlight the overlooked, and to challenge the conventions of scholarly inquiry. After all, who would have thought that the ballot box in Arizona and the kerosene lamp in Libya could dance to the same tune of statistical significance?
As we embark on this scholarly escapade, we invite our readers to peer through the lens of statistics and logic, but also to embrace the spirit of curiosity that fuels the engines of discovery. With a wink to the quirkiness of the interconnected world we inhabit, we set out to illuminate the underexplored intersection of political preference and energy vitality, seeking to ignite conversations as incendiary as a political debate in the desert.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[RESULTS]]
ChatGPT:
[[RESULTS]]
The results of our investigation reveal a surprising and robust correlation between Libertarian votes for Senators in Arizona and kerosene consumption in Libya. Over the period from 1980 to 2020, we found a correlation coefficient of 0.8682488, indicating a strong positive relationship between these seemingly disparate variables. In statistical terms, the coefficient of determination (r-squared) of 0.7538559 further demonstrates that a considerable proportion of the variance in Libertarian votes for Senators in Arizona can be explained by variations in kerosene consumption in Libya. The p-value, less than 0.01, signifies the statistical significance of this association, providing compelling evidence in support of our findings.
To visually encapsulate our discovery, Figure 1 presents a scatterplot illustrating the striking correlation between Libertarian votes for Senators in Arizona and kerosene consumption in Libya. The scatterplot provides a tangible depiction of the alignment between these two unlikely bedfellows, inviting contemplation on the interplay between political choice and energy dynamics.
The strength of this correlation prompts us to reflect on the intricate interconnections that underpin global phenomena. While the juxtaposition of political preferences in the desert state of Arizona and kerosene usage in Libya may raise eyebrows, our analysis demonstrates that these seemingly incongruous elements may share a common thread, much like finding a cactus in a sand dune.
These findings are not only intriguing but also emphasize the need to delve deeper into the multifaceted relationships that shape our world. While this research may seem as unconventional as an oasis in a barren land, it offers fertile ground for further exploration at the intersection of political behavior and energy patterns. Our study highlights the potential for unexpected correlations and beckons researchers to navigate the uncharted terrain where political tides ebb and flow alongside the luminosity of kerosene lanterns in a far-off land.
In summary, our investigation has unveiled a compelling statistical association between Libertarian votes for Senators in Arizona and kerosene consumption in Libya, acquainting us with the unforeseen synergies that thrive amidst the diverse landscapes of politics and energy. As we venture forth into the academic arena, we invite scholars to kindle their curiosity, recognizing that scholarly inquiry may, at times, ignite like a spontaneous combustion in the realm of the unexpected.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics 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 Libertarian votes for Senators in Arizona and Kerosene used in Libya. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.
Limit your response to 500 tokens.
Here are the title, abstract, literature review, and results sections. Please harken back to 1-2 of the goofy items in the literature review, but pretend to take them completely seriously. Discuss how your results supported the prior research.
Do not write a conclusion. I will add a conclusion after this.
[[TITLE]]
"Fueling Political Fire: Examining the Flammable Relationship between Libertarian Votes in Arizona and Kerosene Consumption in Libya"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the curious connection between Libertarian votes for Senators in Arizona and kerosene consumption in Libya. Drawing on extensive data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, our research team has uncovered a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.8682488, with a statistical significance denoted by p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 1980 to 2020. While this relationship may seem to ignite skepticism, our findings shed light on the potential interplay between seemingly unrelated political and energy dynamics. Our study offers an illuminating perspective, blending political science and energy economics, while subtly suggesting that perhaps, at times, political waves can be influenced by the fiery consumption of kerosene abroad.
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
In the pursuit of uncovering the confluence of libertarian votes in Arizona and kerosene utilization in Libya, our investigation commences with an analysis of existing literature. A comprehensive review of related studies reveals a tapestry of scholarly inquiries, ranging from socioeconomic analyses to geopolitical examinations.
Smith, in "Political Ideologies and Energy Landscapes," posits a compelling theory regarding the ideological underpinnings shaping energy consumption patterns. Meanwhile, Doe, in "Energy Economics and Electoral Dynamics," elaborates on the interplay between political preferences and fuel usage, offering a nuanced perspective on the potential linkages between seemingly disparate domains. Furthermore, Jones, in "Libertarian Leanings and Global Fuel Fluctuations," catalyzes our contemplation of the multifaceted influences that permeate the global energy arena.
Beyond these works, broader explorations into the realm of energy economics and political behavior have also piqued our interest. "The Energy Paradox: Unraveling the Mysteries of Fuel and Freedom" by Sands and "The Libertarian Manifesto: A Political and Economic Odyssey" by Canyon serve as poignant reminders of the intricate interdependencies embedded within energy landscapes and political ideologies.
Turning to more unconventional sources, the fiction works "Desert Dreams: A Political Tale" by Mirage and "Kerosene Chronicles: A Combustible Conversation" by Blaze offer a creative detour into the realm of literary imagination, where the flames of political fervor intertwine with the luminosity of energy prospects. Meanwhile, cinematic portrayals in movies such as "Arizona Heatwave" and "Libyan Lanterns" offer anecdotal glimpses into the contextual intricacies of our research domain, albeit with a touch of dramatic flair and celluloid innovation.
As our review sets the stage for the subsequent analyses, this amalgamation of scholarship, fiction, and cinematic interpretation serves as both a scaffold and a springboard for our uniquely multifaceted approach to understanding the enigmatic entanglement of libertarian votes in Arizona and kerosene utilization in Libya. Through this eclectic lens, we invite our readers to embark on a journey that is as illuminating as the flickering flame of a kerosene lamp and as unpredictable as the ever-shifting sands of political preference.
[[RESULTS]]
The results of our investigation reveal a surprising and robust correlation between Libertarian votes for Senators in Arizona and kerosene consumption in Libya. Over the period from 1980 to 2020, we found a correlation coefficient of 0.8682488, indicating a strong positive relationship between these seemingly disparate variables. In statistical terms, the coefficient of determination (r-squared) of 0.7538559 further demonstrates that a considerable proportion of the variance in Libertarian votes for Senators in Arizona can be explained by variations in kerosene consumption in Libya. The p-value, less than 0.01, signifies the statistical significance of this association, providing compelling evidence in support of our findings.
To visually encapsulate our discovery, Figure 1 presents a scatterplot illustrating the striking correlation between Libertarian votes for Senators in Arizona and kerosene consumption in Libya. The scatterplot provides a tangible depiction of the alignment between these two unlikely bedfellows, inviting contemplation on the interplay between political choice and energy dynamics.
The strength of this correlation prompts us to reflect on the intricate interconnections that underpin global phenomena. While the juxtaposition of political preferences in the desert state of Arizona and kerosene usage in Libya may raise eyebrows, our analysis demonstrates that these seemingly incongruous elements may share a common thread, much like finding a cactus in a sand dune.
These findings are not only intriguing but also emphasize the need to delve deeper into the multifaceted relationships that shape our world. While this research may seem as unconventional as an oasis in a barren land, it offers fertile ground for further exploration at the intersection of political behavior and energy patterns. Our study highlights the potential for unexpected correlations and beckons researchers to navigate the uncharted terrain where political tides ebb and flow alongside the luminosity of kerosene lanterns in a far-off land.
In summary, our investigation has unveiled a compelling statistical association between Libertarian votes for Senators in Arizona and kerosene consumption in Libya, acquainting us with the unforeseen synergies that thrive amidst the diverse landscapes of politics and energy. As we venture forth into the academic arena, we invite scholars to kindle their curiosity, recognizing that scholarly inquiry may, at times, ignite like a spontaneous combustion in the realm of the unexpected.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[DISCUSSION]]
ChatGPT:
[[DISCUSSION]]
The findings of our study shed light on the unanticipated alignment between Libertarian votes for Senators in Arizona and kerosene consumption in Libya. This seemingly unlikely relationship, reminiscent of discovering a kerosene lamp in a ballot box, not only underscores the intricate interplay between political behavioral dynamics and energy utilization patterns but also raises intriguing implications for the broader understanding of global interconnectedness.
The robust correlation coefficient of 0.8682488 that we uncovered aligns with previous scholarly insights that have probed into the enigmatic interdependencies among political ideologies and energy landscapes. The literature review illuminated the work of Smith, Doe, and Jones, whose deliberations framed our contemplation of the nuanced connections between political orientations and fuel preferences. While the juxtaposition of libertarian sentiments in Arizona and kerosene consumption in Libya may elicit raised eyebrows akin to spotting a cactus in a sea of sand, our findings provide empirical credence to the conjectures advanced by prior scholars. This alignment, akin to a serendipitous discovery in a desert expanse, underscores the interwoven fabric of political leanings and energy practices, where the heat of political fervor meets the illuminating glow of kerosene lanterns.
The statistical significance denoted by a p-value of less than 0.01 fortifies the credibility of this correlation, echoing the fervor of libertarian passion amidst the fiery consumption of kerosene abroad. This outcome underscores the need to channel the enthusiastic curiosity of scholarly inquiry toward navigating uncharted terrain, akin to traversing through the shifting political sands alongside the luminosity of kerosene lanterns. The tangible representation of this association in Figure 1 conjures contemplation on the dance between political choices and energy dynamics, presenting a visual allegory that is as evocative as the flickering flame of a kerosene lamp and as striking as a political rally.
Moreover, our analysis of the coefficient of determination (r-squared) of 0.7538559 emphasizes that a considerable proportion of the variance in Libertarian votes for Senators in Arizona can be attributed to variations in kerosene consumption in Libya. This statistical insight aligns with the intricate web of connections illuminated by the amalgamated scholarly inquiries, cinematic portrayals, and literary imaginings that permeate our research domain. As sands of political preference shift and global fuel fluctuations wax and wane, our study beckons scholars to recognize the unforeseen synergies that thrive amidst diverse landscapes, just as a flickering kerosene lantern in a far-off land can illuminate the unseen pathways of understanding political choices.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics 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 Libertarian votes for Senators in Arizona and Kerosene used in Libya. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.
Limit your response to 300 tokens. At the very end, assert that no more research is needed in this area.
Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
"Fueling Political Fire: Examining the Flammable Relationship between Libertarian Votes in Arizona and Kerosene Consumption in Libya"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the curious connection between Libertarian votes for Senators in Arizona and kerosene consumption in Libya. Drawing on extensive data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, our research team has uncovered a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.8682488, with a statistical significance denoted by p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 1980 to 2020. While this relationship may seem to ignite skepticism, our findings shed light on the potential interplay between seemingly unrelated political and energy dynamics. Our study offers an illuminating perspective, blending political science and energy economics, while subtly suggesting that perhaps, at times, political waves can be influenced by the fiery consumption of kerosene abroad.
[[INTRDUCTION]]
The intersection of political ideology and global energy dynamics has long captivated researchers seeking to understand the seemingly disparate forces that shape our world. In this study, we embark on a rigorous exploration of the remarkable relationship between Libertarian votes for Senators in Arizona and kerosene consumption in Libya. While this connection may initially seem as elusive as a mirage in the desert, our analysis yields compelling evidence of a correlation that is as striking as a camel in a haystack.
As we navigate through the labyrinth of data from various sources, such as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab and the Energy Information Administration, we are met with a web of statistics and mathematical nuances. Our quest begins with a critical examination of the available empirical evidence spanning over four decades, daring to uncover the threads that link the seemingly incongruent patterns of political choice and kerosene vitality.
The relationship between political ideology and energy consumption is as complex as deciphering hieroglyphics in a sandstorm. And yet, as we delve deeper into the enigmatic terrain of libertarian sentiments and kerosene expenditure, our findings begin to paint a picture as vivid as a desert sunset. The allure of our investigation lies in its potential to unravel the unexpected, to highlight the overlooked, and to challenge the conventions of scholarly inquiry. After all, who would have thought that the ballot box in Arizona and the kerosene lamp in Libya could dance to the same tune of statistical significance?
As we embark on this scholarly escapade, we invite our readers to peer through the lens of statistics and logic, but also to embrace the spirit of curiosity that fuels the engines of discovery. With a wink to the quirkiness of the interconnected world we inhabit, we set out to illuminate the underexplored intersection of political preference and energy vitality, seeking to ignite conversations as incendiary as a political debate in the desert.
[[RESULTS]]
The results of our investigation reveal a surprising and robust correlation between Libertarian votes for Senators in Arizona and kerosene consumption in Libya. Over the period from 1980 to 2020, we found a correlation coefficient of 0.8682488, indicating a strong positive relationship between these seemingly disparate variables. In statistical terms, the coefficient of determination (r-squared) of 0.7538559 further demonstrates that a considerable proportion of the variance in Libertarian votes for Senators in Arizona can be explained by variations in kerosene consumption in Libya. The p-value, less than 0.01, signifies the statistical significance of this association, providing compelling evidence in support of our findings.
To visually encapsulate our discovery, Figure 1 presents a scatterplot illustrating the striking correlation between Libertarian votes for Senators in Arizona and kerosene consumption in Libya. The scatterplot provides a tangible depiction of the alignment between these two unlikely bedfellows, inviting contemplation on the interplay between political choice and energy dynamics.
The strength of this correlation prompts us to reflect on the intricate interconnections that underpin global phenomena. While the juxtaposition of political preferences in the desert state of Arizona and kerosene usage in Libya may raise eyebrows, our analysis demonstrates that these seemingly incongruous elements may share a common thread, much like finding a cactus in a sand dune.
These findings are not only intriguing but also emphasize the need to delve deeper into the multifaceted relationships that shape our world. While this research may seem as unconventional as an oasis in a barren land, it offers fertile ground for further exploration at the intersection of political behavior and energy patterns. Our study highlights the potential for unexpected correlations and beckons researchers to navigate the uncharted terrain where political tides ebb and flow alongside the luminosity of kerosene lanterns in a far-off land.
In summary, our investigation has unveiled a compelling statistical association between Libertarian votes for Senators in Arizona and kerosene consumption in Libya, acquainting us with the unforeseen synergies that thrive amidst the diverse landscapes of politics and energy. As we venture forth into the academic arena, we invite scholars to kindle their curiosity, recognizing that scholarly inquiry may, at times, ignite like a spontaneous combustion in the realm of the unexpected.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[CONCLUSION]]
ChatGPT:
[[CONCLUSION]]
In conclusion, our research has elucidated a remarkable association between Libertarian votes for Senators in Arizona and kerosene consumption in Libya. The substantial correlation coefficient of 0.8682488, coupled with a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01, underscores the fiery bond between these seemingly incongruous variables. As we navigate through the labyrinth of statistics, it becomes evident that the political heat in Arizona can indeed resonate with the illuminating energy dynamics in Libya. This unexpected connection between political preference and energy consumption prompts us to consider the intertwined nature of global phenomena, much like uncovering a hidden gem in the desert sand.
Our study not only sheds light on the unanticipated linkages within the realms of political science and energy economics but also ignites a spark for further exploration. However, in the spirit of kindling academic discourse rather than perpetually fanning the flames of inquiry, we boldly assert that no further research is needed in this area. For as much as we delight in unraveling the intricate threads that weave through the tapestry of human behavior and energy patterns, perhaps some mysteries are best left to flicker in the enigmatic glow of statistical significance. After all, as they say, there's no need to keep pouring kerosene on a well-lit political fire.
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 Political Fire: Examining the Flammable Relationship between Libertarian Votes in Arizona and Kerosene Consumption in Libya. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.
ChatGPT:
The Journal of Cross-Cultural Combustion Studies
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of nonprofit research organizations and associations. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding nonprofit, academic, or scientific association or organization that would sponsor research that resulted in a paper entited Fueling Political Fire: Examining the Flammable Relationship between Libertarian Votes in Arizona and Kerosene Consumption in Libya. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.
ChatGPT:
The Center for Global Energy Economics and Political Science
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 Political Fire: Examining the Flammable Relationship between Libertarian Votes in Arizona and Kerosene Consumption in Libya with an abstract of This paper delves into the curious connection between Libertarian votes for Senators in Arizona and kerosene consumption in Libya. Drawing on extensive data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, our research team has uncovered a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.8682488, with a statistical significance denoted by p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 1980 to 2020. While this relationship may seem to ignite skepticism, our findings shed light on the potential interplay between seemingly unrelated political and energy dynamics. Our study offers an illuminating perspective, blending political science and energy economics, while subtly suggesting that perhaps, at times, political waves can be influenced by the fiery consumption of kerosene abroad.
ChatGPT:
Libertarian votes Arizona, kerosene consumption Libya, correlation coefficient 0.8682488, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, Energy Information Administration, political science, energy economics, political waves, kerosene consumption, Libya, Senators Arizona, statistical significance, p < 0.01
*There is a bunch of Python happening behind the scenes to turn this prompt sequence into a PDF.
Discover a new correlation
View all correlations
View all research papers
Report an error
Data details
Votes for Libertarian Senators in ArizonaDetailed data title: Total number of votes cast for Federal Libertarian Senate candidates in Arizona
Source: MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse
See what else correlates with Votes for Libertarian Senators in Arizona
Kerosene used in Libya
Detailed data title: Volume of kerosene used consumed in Libya in millions of barrels per day
Source: Energy Information Administration
See what else correlates with Kerosene used in Libya
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 = 0.7538559 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 75.4% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Kerosene used in Libya) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Votes for Libertarian Senators in Arizona) over the 12 years from 1980 through 2020.
p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.00025. 0.0002495714980774160400000000
The p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme. More specifically the p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme if we had only tested one pair of variables one time.
But I am a p-villain. I absolutely did not test only one pair of variables one time. I correlated hundreds of millions of pairs of variables. I threw boatloads of data into an industrial-sized blender to find this correlation.
Who is going to stop me? p-value reporting doesn't require me to report how many calculations I had to go through in order to find a low p-value!
On average, you will find a correaltion as strong as 0.87 in 0.025% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 4,007 random variables Which I absolutely did.
with the same 11 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 11 because we have two variables measured over a period of 12 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.
[ 0.59, 0.96 ] 95% correlation confidence interval (using the Fisher z-transformation)
The confidence interval is an estimate the range of the value of the correlation coefficient, using the correlation itself as an input. The values are meant to be the low and high end of the correlation coefficient with 95% confidence.
This one is a bit more complciated than the other calculations, but I include it because many people have been pushing for confidence intervals instead of p-value calculations (for example: NEJM. However, if you are dredging data, you can reliably find yourself in the 5%. That's my goal!
All values for the years included above: If I were being very sneaky, I could trim years from the beginning or end of the datasets to increase the correlation on some pairs of variables. I don't do that because there are already plenty of correlations in my database without monkeying with the years.
Still, sometimes one of the variables has more years of data available than the other. This page only shows the overlapping years. To see all the years, click on "See what else correlates with..." link above.
| 1980 | 1982 | 1988 | 1992 | 1994 | 1998 | 2000 | 2004 | 2006 | 2010 | 2012 | 2020 | |
| Votes for Libertarian Senators in Arizona (Total votes) | 12008 | 20100 | 20849 | 22613 | 75493 | 23004 | 70724 | 51798 | 48231 | 80097 | 102109 | 379 |
| Kerosene used in Libya (Million Barrels/Day) | 4.00641 | 4.96795 | 3.3 | 4.1 | 4.7 | 4.3 | 6.31495 | 6.23046 | 5.20981 | 8 | 8 | 1.47737 |
Why this works
- Data dredging: I have 25,153 variables in my database. I compare all these variables against each other to find ones that randomly match up. That's 632,673,409 correlation calculations! This is called “data dredging.” Instead of starting with a hypothesis and testing it, I instead abused the data to see what correlations shake out. It’s a dangerous way to go about analysis, because any sufficiently large dataset will yield strong correlations completely at random.
- Lack of causal connection: There is probably
Because these pages are automatically generated, it's possible that the two variables you are viewing are in fact causually related. I take steps to prevent the obvious ones from showing on the site (I don't let data about the weather in one city correlate with the weather in a neighboring city, for example), but sometimes they still pop up. If they are related, cool! You found a loophole.
no direct connection between these variables, despite what the AI says above. This is exacerbated by the fact that I used "Years" as the base variable. Lots of things happen in a year that are not related to each other! Most studies would use something like "one person" in stead of "one year" to be the "thing" studied. - Observations not independent: For many variables, sequential years are not independent of each other. If a population of people is continuously doing something every day, there is no reason to think they would suddenly change how they are doing that thing on January 1. A simple
Personally I don't find any p-value calculation to be 'simple,' but you know what I mean.
p-value calculation does not take this into account, so mathematically it appears less probable than it really is.
Try it yourself
You can calculate the values on this page on your own! Try running the Python code to see the calculation results. Step 1: Download and install Python on your computer.Step 2: Open a plaintext editor like Notepad and paste the code below into it.
Step 3: Save the file as "calculate_correlation.py" in a place you will remember, like your desktop. Copy the file location to your clipboard. On Windows, you can right-click the file and click "Properties," and then copy what comes after "Location:" As an example, on my computer the location is "C:\Users\tyler\Desktop"
Step 4: Open a command line window. For example, by pressing start and typing "cmd" and them pressing enter.
Step 5: Install the required modules by typing "pip install numpy", then pressing enter, then typing "pip install scipy", then pressing enter.
Step 6: Navigate to the location where you saved the Python file by using the "cd" command. For example, I would type "cd C:\Users\tyler\Desktop" and push enter.
Step 7: Run the Python script by typing "python calculate_correlation.py"
If you run into any issues, I suggest asking ChatGPT to walk you through installing Python and running the code below on your system. Try this question:
"Walk me through installing Python on my computer to run a script that uses scipy and numpy. Go step-by-step and ask me to confirm before moving on. Start by asking me questions about my operating system so that you know how to proceed. Assume I want the simplest installation with the latest version of Python and that I do not currently have any of the necessary elements installed. Remember to only give me one step per response and confirm I have done it before proceeding."
# These modules make it easier to perform the calculation
import numpy as np
from scipy import stats
# We'll define a function that we can call to return the correlation calculations
def calculate_correlation(array1, array2):
# Calculate Pearson correlation coefficient and p-value
correlation, p_value = stats.pearsonr(array1, array2)
# Calculate R-squared as the square of the correlation coefficient
r_squared = correlation**2
return correlation, r_squared, p_value
# These are the arrays for the variables shown on this page, but you can modify them to be any two sets of numbers
array_1 = np.array([12008,20100,20849,22613,75493,23004,70724,51798,48231,80097,102109,379,])
array_2 = np.array([4.00641,4.96795,3.3,4.1,4.7,4.3,6.31495,6.23046,5.20981,8,8,1.47737,])
array_1_name = "Votes for Libertarian Senators in Arizona"
array_2_name = "Kerosene used in Libya"
# Perform the calculation
print(f"Calculating the correlation between {array_1_name} and {array_2_name}...")
correlation, r_squared, p_value = calculate_correlation(array_1, array_2)
# Print the results
print("Correlation Coefficient:", correlation)
print("R-squared:", r_squared)
print("P-value:", p_value)Reuseable content
You may re-use the images on this page for any purpose, even commercial purposes, without asking for permission. The only requirement is that you attribute Tyler Vigen. Attribution can take many different forms. If you leave the "tylervigen.com" link in the image, that satisfies it just fine. If you remove it and move it to a footnote, that's fine too. You can also just write "Charts courtesy of Tyler Vigen" at the bottom of an article.You do not need to attribute "the spurious correlations website," and you don't even need to link here if you don't want to. I don't gain anything from pageviews. There are no ads on this site, there is nothing for sale, and I am not for hire.
For the record, I am just one person. Tyler Vigen, he/him/his. I do have degrees, but they should not go after my name unless you want to annoy my wife. If that is your goal, then go ahead and cite me as "Tyler Vigen, A.A. A.A.S. B.A. J.D." Otherwise it is just "Tyler Vigen."
When spoken, my last name is pronounced "vegan," like I don't eat meat.
Full license details.
For more on re-use permissions, or to get a signed release form, see tylervigen.com/permission.
Download images for these variables:
- High resolution line chart
The image linked here is a Scalable Vector Graphic (SVG). It is the highest resolution that is possible to achieve. It scales up beyond the size of the observable universe without pixelating. You do not need to email me asking if I have a higher resolution image. I do not. The physical limitations of our universe prevent me from providing you with an image that is any higher resolution than this one.
If you insert it into a PowerPoint presentation (a tool well-known for managing things that are the scale of the universe), you can right-click > "Ungroup" or "Create Shape" and then edit the lines and text directly. You can also change the colors this way.
Alternatively you can use a tool like Inkscape. - High resolution line chart, optimized for mobile
- Alternative high resolution line chart
- Scatterplot
- Portable line chart (png)
- Portable line chart (png), optimized for mobile
- Line chart for only Votes for Libertarian Senators in Arizona
- Line chart for only Kerosene used in Libya
- AI-generated correlation image
- The spurious research paper: Fueling Political Fire: Examining the Flammable Relationship between Libertarian Votes in Arizona and Kerosene Consumption in Libya
Cheers to you for rating this correlation!
Correlation ID: 4404 · Black Variable ID: 26202 · Red Variable ID: 24637
