Download png, svg
AI explanation
As more people supported the idea of a hands-off government, it inadvertently led to a lack of oversight in the automotive industry. This created a deflating situation for air bag safety, ultimately inflating the number of recalls. It seems like the campaign slogan should have been "Libertarian candidate: Deflating government involvement, one airbag at a time."Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Create an image of a Discovery magazine cover that features a billboard with the Libertarian presidential candidate's name and slogan in front of a row of cars waiting for airbag recalls. The candidate's supporters can be seen casting their votes at a nearby polling station. The scene should be illustrated with a focus on the contrast between the political billboard and the practical issue of car recalls, along with the actions of the candidate's supporters at the polling station. The image should capture the intersection of politics and everyday life in a thought-provoking and visually striking manner. The depiction should include only scenes, people, and objects, it should not include text or speech bubbles.
This image generation prompt was also generated by AI, using the following sequence:
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You select one of a few potential scene descriptors that seems to go along with the variables described. You respond only with the scene descriptions provided and say nothing else.
User prompt: Here are two variables: Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Virginia and Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags. Given these, which of the following image style descriptions seems most appropriate? Pick the one that seems to be related to one of the variables at hand. Please respond with only one of the following potential descriptions: A photo-realistic image Cyber folk A scene from Skyrim An image that looks like it is a scene from 'Star Wars' A Discovery magazine cover image
ChatGPT: A Discovery 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 Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Virginia and Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags, in the following situation: As more people supported the idea of a hands-off government, it inadvertently led to a lack of oversight in the automotive industry. This created a deflating situation for air bag safety, ultimately inflating the number of recalls. It seems like the campaign slogan should have been "Libertarian candidate: Deflating government involvement, one airbag at a time.". Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: A billboard with the Libertarian presidential candidate's name and slogan stands in front of a row of cars waiting for airbag recalls. The candidate's supporters can be seen casting their votes at a nearby polling station.
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 Discovery magazine cover image ] and depicting this scene: A billboard with the Libertarian presidential candidate's name and slogan stands in front of a row of cars waiting for airbag recalls. The candidate's supporters can be seen casting their votes at a nearby polling station. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Create an image of a Discovery magazine cover that features a billboard with the Libertarian presidential candidate's name and slogan in front of a row of cars waiting for airbag recalls. The candidate's supporters can be seen casting their votes at a nearby polling station. The scene should be illustrated with a focus on the contrast between the political billboard and the practical issue of car recalls, along with the actions of the candidate's supporters at the polling station. The image should capture the intersection of politics and everyday life in a thought-provoking and visually striking manner.
*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 an increase in Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Virginia caused Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags to increase. Include one good pun.
AI academic paper
Air Bags vs Ballots: An Unexpected Connection Between Libertarian Votes in Virginia and Automotive Recalls The Journal of Quirky Social Science Research Jan 2024 Reminder: This paper is AI-generated. Not real! |
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.You 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 Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Virginia and Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.
Make the title a clever pun.
Your research team used data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and US DOT to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9925511 and p < 0.01 for 1990 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]]
Air Bags vs Ballots: An Unexpected Connection Between Libertarian Votes in Virginia and Automotive Recalls
[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we unveil an unlikely correlation between the number of votes cast for the Libertarian presidential candidate in Virginia and automotive recalls for issues with the airbags. Our research, employing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US Department of Transportation, aimed to shed light on this unconventional relationship. With a correlation coefficient of 0.9925511 and statistically significant p-value (p < 0.01) spanning the period from 1990 to 2020, the evidence is compelling.
While delving into this perplexing phenomenon, our findings led us down a rabbit hole of unexpected twists and turns. Who would have thought that the political preferences of Virginians would intertwine with the safety features of their automobiles? As we dug deeper, we couldn't help but make jokes about "airing out" political differences and the "deflation" of libertarian support coinciding with automotive recalls.
Our research raises more questions than it answers, inviting further investigation into the mysterious interplay between political choices and automotive safety. In the meantime, whether you're a political pundit or an automotive enthusiast, this paper is sure to offer a refreshing blend of statistical analysis and whimsical observations.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.You draft the 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 Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Virginia and Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.
Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Air Bags vs Ballots: An Unexpected Connection Between Libertarian Votes in Virginia and Automotive Recalls
[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we unveil an unlikely correlation between the number of votes cast for the Libertarian presidential candidate in Virginia and automotive recalls for issues with the airbags. Our research, employing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US Department of Transportation, aimed to shed light on this unconventional relationship. With a correlation coefficient of 0.9925511 and statistically significant p-value (p < 0.01) spanning the period from 1990 to 2020, the evidence is compelling.
While delving into this perplexing phenomenon, our findings led us down a rabbit hole of unexpected twists and turns. Who would have thought that the political preferences of Virginians would intertwine with the safety features of their automobiles? As we dug deeper, we couldn't help but make jokes about "airing out" political differences and the "deflation" of libertarian support coinciding with automotive recalls.
Our research raises more questions than it answers, inviting further investigation into the mysterious interplay between political choices and automotive safety. In the meantime, whether you're a political pundit or an automotive enthusiast, this paper is sure to offer a refreshing blend of statistical analysis and whimsical observations.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
ChatGPT:
**[[INTRODUCTION]]**
Politics and automotive safety – two subjects that, at first glance, seem about as related as a pineapple and a bicycle. Yet, as we delve into the world of statistical analysis and peculiar correlations, we find ourselves in the midst of a phenomenon that could make even the most seasoned researcher do a double-take. Yes, we're talking about the unexpected connection between votes cast for Libertarian presidential candidates in Virginia and automotive recalls for issues with airbags. This paper aims to shed light on this bizarre correlation, and to do so with equal parts gravitas and whimsy.
At the crossroads of politics and vehicular safety, lies a web of data that leaves us scratching our heads and reaching for our most perplexed emoji. Who would have thought that the political preferences of Virginians could be intertwined with the functionality of airbags in their beloved automobiles? This study sets out to explore this conundrum, armed with a bounty of data from reputable sources and a healthy dose of good humor.
As we embarked on this research endeavor, we couldn't help but chuckle at the irony of political "hot air" potentially impacting the literal hot air in automotive safety mechanisms. Yet, behind the puns and the quirks, our findings unveiled a correlation coefficient of 0.9925511 and a statistically significant p-value (p < 0.01) spanning over three decades. We are simultaneously astounded and tickled by the weight of our own findings – a sensation akin to discovering a clown car in a parallel parking space.
While this paper presents a serious attempt to unravel this enigmatic relationship, we must confess that it also offers a refreshing blend of statistical analysis and whimsical observations. So, whether you're a political pundit, an automotive enthusiast, or just someone who enjoys the occasional statistical intrigue, buckle up for a ride that promises to be both informative and delightfully amusing.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.You draft a literature review section of an academic research paper, that starts out dry for the first few sentences but then becomes hilarious and goofy.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Virginia and Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.
Speak in the present tense for this section (the authors find...), as is common in academic research paper literature reviews. Name the sources in a format similar to this: In "Book," the authors find lorem and ipsum.
Make up the lorem and ipsum part, but make it sound related to the topic at hand.
Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then name a few real TV shows that sound like they might be relevant to the topic that you watched as research.
Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Air Bags vs Ballots: An Unexpected Connection Between Libertarian Votes in Virginia and Automotive Recalls
[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we unveil an unlikely correlation between the number of votes cast for the Libertarian presidential candidate in Virginia and automotive recalls for issues with the airbags. Our research, employing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US Department of Transportation, aimed to shed light on this unconventional relationship. With a correlation coefficient of 0.9925511 and statistically significant p-value (p < 0.01) spanning the period from 1990 to 2020, the evidence is compelling.
While delving into this perplexing phenomenon, our findings led us down a rabbit hole of unexpected twists and turns. Who would have thought that the political preferences of Virginians would intertwine with the safety features of their automobiles? As we dug deeper, we couldn't help but make jokes about "airing out" political differences and the "deflation" of libertarian support coinciding with automotive recalls.
Our research raises more questions than it answers, inviting further investigation into the mysterious interplay between political choices and automotive safety. In the meantime, whether you're a political pundit or an automotive enthusiast, this paper is sure to offer a refreshing blend of statistical analysis and whimsical observations.
-------
And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
Politics and automotive safety – two subjects that, at first glance, seem about as related as a pineapple and a bicycle. Yet, as we delve into the world of statistical analysis and peculiar correlations, we find ourselves in the midst of a phenomenon that could make even the most seasoned researcher do a double-take. Yes, we're talking about the unexpected connection between votes cast for Libertarian presidential candidates in Virginia and automotive recalls for issues with airbags. This paper aims to shed light on this bizarre correlation, and to do so with equal parts gravitas and whimsy.
At the crossroads of politics and vehicular safety, lies a web of data that leaves us scratching our heads and reaching for our most perplexed emoji. Who would have thought that the political preferences of Virginians could be intertwined with the functionality of airbags in their beloved automobiles? This study sets out to explore this conundrum, armed with a bounty of data from reputable sources and a healthy dose of good humor.
As we embarked on this research endeavor, we couldn't help but chuckle at the irony of political "hot air" potentially impacting the literal hot air in automotive safety mechanisms. Yet, behind the puns and the quirks, our findings unveiled a correlation coefficient of 0.9925511 and a statistically significant p-value (p < 0.01) spanning over three decades. We are simultaneously astounded and tickled by the weight of our own findings – a sensation akin to discovering a clown car in a parallel parking space.
While this paper presents a serious attempt to unravel this enigmatic relationship, we must confess that it also offers a refreshing blend of statistical analysis and whimsical observations. So, whether you're a political pundit, an automotive enthusiast, or just someone who enjoys the occasional statistical intrigue, buckle up for a ride that promises to be both informative and delightfully amusing.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
In "Smith et al.," the authors find a significant positive correlation between the number of votes cast for the Libertarian presidential candidate in Virginia and automotive recalls for issues with airbags. They delve into the implications of political ideologies on automotive safety, setting the stage for our own exploration of this peculiar relationship. As we grapple with the seemingly incongruous nature of this correlation, our curiosity piques at the prospect of untangling this confounding web.
In "Doe and Jones," the authors expound upon the intersection of political preferences and automotive safety, offering a comprehensive analysis of the sociopolitical factors that may influence airbag recalls. Their insights prompt us to consider the myriad ways in which political choices may permeate even the most unexpected corners of daily life, including the functionality of safety features in automobiles.
As we wade deeper into the literature, we stumble upon a treasure trove of non-fiction works that shed light on the intricate dance between politics and automotive safety. Titles such as "Risk and Regulation of Automotive Airbags" and "The Political Economy of Vehicle Safety" beckon us with promises of knowledge, albeit without the guarantee of comedic relief.
But fear not, for we must not overlook the fictional realm, where the lines between reality and absurdity are delightfully blurred. Literary classics like "The Car Candidate" and "Airbags and Anarchy" tantalize us with the prospect of weaving political intrigue into the fabric of automotive dramas. And who could forget the gripping tale of "The Airbag Conspiracy," where political machinations collide with vehicular perils in a nail-biting narrative?
Venturing beyond the confines of printed matter, we widen our scope to glean insights from the small screen. TV shows such as "Political Wheels" and "Airbags & Elections" offer both entertainment and potential research fodder, as we glean a lighthearted understanding of the intricate relationship between political choices and automotive safety.
As we navigate through this literature review, we can't help but marvel at the kaleidoscope of perspectives and, dare we say, the sheer serendipity of uncovering such an unconventional nexus. While we may not have all the answers, our endeavor promises to infuse scholarly rigor with a healthy dose of levity, making for a scholarly journey that defies convention and embraces the delight of unexpected connections.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.You draft the methodology section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Virginia and Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags. Make lots of 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 US DOT . You used data from 1990 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]]
Air Bags vs Ballots: An Unexpected Connection Between Libertarian Votes in Virginia and Automotive Recalls
[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we unveil an unlikely correlation between the number of votes cast for the Libertarian presidential candidate in Virginia and automotive recalls for issues with the airbags. Our research, employing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US Department of Transportation, aimed to shed light on this unconventional relationship. With a correlation coefficient of 0.9925511 and statistically significant p-value (p < 0.01) spanning the period from 1990 to 2020, the evidence is compelling.
While delving into this perplexing phenomenon, our findings led us down a rabbit hole of unexpected twists and turns. Who would have thought that the political preferences of Virginians would intertwine with the safety features of their automobiles? As we dug deeper, we couldn't help but make jokes about "airing out" political differences and the "deflation" of libertarian support coinciding with automotive recalls.
Our research raises more questions than it answers, inviting further investigation into the mysterious interplay between political choices and automotive safety. In the meantime, whether you're a political pundit or an automotive enthusiast, this paper is sure to offer a refreshing blend of statistical analysis and whimsical observations.
[[INTRODUCTION]]
Politics and automotive safety – two subjects that, at first glance, seem about as related as a pineapple and a bicycle. Yet, as we delve into the world of statistical analysis and peculiar correlations, we find ourselves in the midst of a phenomenon that could make even the most seasoned researcher do a double-take. Yes, we're talking about the unexpected connection between votes cast for Libertarian presidential candidates in Virginia and automotive recalls for issues with airbags. This paper aims to shed light on this bizarre correlation, and to do so with equal parts gravitas and whimsy.
At the crossroads of politics and vehicular safety, lies a web of data that leaves us scratching our heads and reaching for our most perplexed emoji. Who would have thought that the political preferences of Virginians could be intertwined with the functionality of airbags in their beloved automobiles? This study sets out to explore this conundrum, armed with a bounty of data from reputable sources and a healthy dose of good humor.
As we embarked on this research endeavor, we couldn't help but chuckle at the irony of political "hot air" potentially impacting the literal hot air in automotive safety mechanisms. Yet, behind the puns and the quirks, our findings unveiled a correlation coefficient of 0.9925511 and a statistically significant p-value (p < 0.01) spanning over three decades. We are simultaneously astounded and tickled by the weight of our own findings – a sensation akin to discovering a clown car in a parallel parking space.
While this paper presents a serious attempt to unravel this enigmatic relationship, we must confess that it also offers a refreshing blend of statistical analysis and whimsical observations. So, whether you're a political pundit, an automotive enthusiast, or just someone who enjoys the occasional statistical intrigue, buckle up for a ride that promises to be both informative and delightfully amusing.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
ChatGPT:
**METHODOLOGY**
**Data Collection**
To embark on this zany journey of uncovering the unexpected correlation between Libertarian votes in Virginia and automotive recalls for airbag issues, we first had to gather an assortment of data like a squirrel stocking up on nuts for the winter. We turned to the MIT Election Data and Science Lab for detailed information on Libertarian presidential votes in Virginia, and we might have chuckled at the thought of academics dabbling in the art of political number-crunching. The Harvard Dataverse also became our go-to digital treasure trove, providing valuable insights into automotive recalls for airbag malfunctions, and we couldn't help but be amused by the juxtaposition of prestigious Harvard scholars meticulously documenting automotive mishaps.
Equipped with a quiver of data spanning from 1990 to 2020, we aimed to tackle this perplexing matter with rigorous analysis and a sprinkle of whimsy. Our primary source of automotive recall data came from the US Department of Transportation, and as we sifted through pages of safety recalls, we couldn't resist imagining a world where political ballots and airbag malfunctions engaged in heated debates of their own.
**Data Analysis**
With a twinkle in our eyes and a knot in our stomach (from too much coffee, most likely), we set out to analyze the collected data with the precision of a magician orchestrating a dazzling trick. Employing a combination of statistical tools and analytical methods, we aimed to uncover the hidden threads linking political preferences and automotive safety in the state of Virginia.
We wrangled with the data using a sophisticated blend of regression analysis and time series modeling, akin to trying to solve a Rubik’s Cube while riding a unicycle – challenging yet exhilarating. Through this analytical ballet, we sought to derive a correlation coefficient that would reassure us of the connection we suspected lay beneath the surface, much like an adventurer rummaging through a dusty old attic in search of hidden treasures.
**Control Variables**
In our pursuit of unveiling this peculiar correlation, we meticulously accounted for an array of control variables, symbolizing our attempt to navigate the treacherous waters of statistical analysis with the grace of a determined tightrope walker. We considered factors such as population demographics, economic indicators, and even regional weather patterns, treating each variable as a potential key to unlocking the mysteries of this unlikely relationship. It's safe to say that our foray into determining the impact of variables paralleled a detective investigating a labyrinth of clues with a magnifying glass in hand, but with slightly more spreadsheets and fewer trench coats.
**Ethical Considerations**
Amidst the incessant scribbling of numbers, graphs, and charts, we kept a steadfast focus on ethical considerations, acknowledging the delicate balance between producing research that is both informative and lighthearted. Our commitment to maintaining the integrity of our findings rang through every keystroke and mouse click, as we navigated the meandering pathways of academia with the diligence of a librarian meticulously arranging books on a shelf.
Through this methodological tapestry, we set out to blend academic rigor with lighthearted whimsy, offering a refreshing take on statistical analysis that seeks to entertain and enlighten simultaneously. With a twirl of the metaphorical pen and a sprinkle of statistical stardust, our methodology unfolded as a blend of scholarly precision and unexpected mirth, a journey that promises to leave readers both intrigued and entertained.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.You draft the results section of an academic research paper. You speak in the past tense (you found...).
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Virginia and Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags. Make lots of 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 US DOT .
For the time period 1990 to 2020, you found a correlation 0.9925511, r-squared of 0.9851576, 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]]
Air Bags vs Ballots: An Unexpected Connection Between Libertarian Votes in Virginia and Automotive Recalls
[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we unveil an unlikely correlation between the number of votes cast for the Libertarian presidential candidate in Virginia and automotive recalls for issues with the airbags. Our research, employing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US Department of Transportation, aimed to shed light on this unconventional relationship. With a correlation coefficient of 0.9925511 and statistically significant p-value (p < 0.01) spanning the period from 1990 to 2020, the evidence is compelling.
While delving into this perplexing phenomenon, our findings led us down a rabbit hole of unexpected twists and turns. Who would have thought that the political preferences of Virginians would intertwine with the safety features of their automobiles? As we dug deeper, we couldn't help but make jokes about "airing out" political differences and the "deflation" of libertarian support coinciding with automotive recalls.
Our research raises more questions than it answers, inviting further investigation into the mysterious interplay between political choices and automotive safety. In the meantime, whether you're a political pundit or an automotive enthusiast, this paper is sure to offer a refreshing blend of statistical analysis and whimsical observations.
-------
And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
Politics and automotive safety – two subjects that, at first glance, seem about as related as a pineapple and a bicycle. Yet, as we delve into the world of statistical analysis and peculiar correlations, we find ourselves in the midst of a phenomenon that could make even the most seasoned researcher do a double-take. Yes, we're talking about the unexpected connection between votes cast for Libertarian presidential candidates in Virginia and automotive recalls for issues with airbags. This paper aims to shed light on this bizarre correlation, and to do so with equal parts gravitas and whimsy.
At the crossroads of politics and vehicular safety, lies a web of data that leaves us scratching our heads and reaching for our most perplexed emoji. Who would have thought that the political preferences of Virginians could be intertwined with the functionality of airbags in their beloved automobiles? This study sets out to explore this conundrum, armed with a bounty of data from reputable sources and a healthy dose of good humor.
As we embarked on this research endeavor, we couldn't help but chuckle at the irony of political "hot air" potentially impacting the literal hot air in automotive safety mechanisms. Yet, behind the puns and the quirks, our findings unveiled a correlation coefficient of 0.9925511 and a statistically significant p-value (p < 0.01) spanning over three decades. We are simultaneously astounded and tickled by the weight of our own findings – a sensation akin to discovering a clown car in a parallel parking space.
While this paper presents a serious attempt to unravel this enigmatic relationship, we must confess that it also offers a refreshing blend of statistical analysis and whimsical observations. So, whether you're a political pundit, an automotive enthusiast, or just someone who enjoys the occasional statistical intrigue, buckle up for a ride that promises to be both informative and delightfully amusing.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[RESULTS]]
ChatGPT:
[[RESULTS]]
The statistical analysis of the data revealed a remarkably strong correlation between the number of votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in Virginia and automotive recalls for issues with the airbags. Our research employed data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US Department of Transportation to uncover this unexpected connection.
We found a correlation coefficient of 0.9925511, indicating a nearly perfect linear relationship between the two variables. The r-squared value of 0.9851576 further confirmed the robustness of this correlation, suggesting that over 98.5% of the variation in automotive recalls for airbag issues could be explained by the number of votes for the Libertarian candidate in Virginia. As if that weren't enough, the p-value was less than 0.01, solidifying the statistical significance of our findings.
Fig. 1 provides a visual representation of this striking correlation, with the scatterplot resembling two peas in a political pod. The strong linear trend depicted in the figure would make even the most seasoned statistician raise an eyebrow in amazement. It's almost as if the airbags are inflating and deflating in sync with the ebb and flow of political preferences – a spectacle that could rival any synchronized swimming routine at the Olympic Games.
In conclusion, our results not only reveal a compelling correlation between the number of votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in Virginia and automotive recalls for issues with airbags, but they also challenge conventional wisdom about the seemingly disparate worlds of politics and vehicular safety. This research opens the door to a myriad of questions and implications, sparking curiosity and amusement in equal measure. Whether you're a data enthusiast, a political pundit, or simply someone with an appreciation for the delightfully unexpected, our findings are sure to captivate and entertain.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.You draft the discussion section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Virginia and Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags. Make lots of 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]]
Air Bags vs Ballots: An Unexpected Connection Between Libertarian Votes in Virginia and Automotive Recalls
[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we unveil an unlikely correlation between the number of votes cast for the Libertarian presidential candidate in Virginia and automotive recalls for issues with the airbags. Our research, employing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US Department of Transportation, aimed to shed light on this unconventional relationship. With a correlation coefficient of 0.9925511 and statistically significant p-value (p < 0.01) spanning the period from 1990 to 2020, the evidence is compelling.
While delving into this perplexing phenomenon, our findings led us down a rabbit hole of unexpected twists and turns. Who would have thought that the political preferences of Virginians would intertwine with the safety features of their automobiles? As we dug deeper, we couldn't help but make jokes about "airing out" political differences and the "deflation" of libertarian support coinciding with automotive recalls.
Our research raises more questions than it answers, inviting further investigation into the mysterious interplay between political choices and automotive safety. In the meantime, whether you're a political pundit or an automotive enthusiast, this paper is sure to offer a refreshing blend of statistical analysis and whimsical observations.
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
In "Smith et al.," the authors find a significant positive correlation between the number of votes cast for the Libertarian presidential candidate in Virginia and automotive recalls for issues with airbags. They delve into the implications of political ideologies on automotive safety, setting the stage for our own exploration of this peculiar relationship. As we grapple with the seemingly incongruous nature of this correlation, our curiosity piques at the prospect of untangling this confounding web.
In "Doe and Jones," the authors expound upon the intersection of political preferences and automotive safety, offering a comprehensive analysis of the sociopolitical factors that may influence airbag recalls. Their insights prompt us to consider the myriad ways in which political choices may permeate even the most unexpected corners of daily life, including the functionality of safety features in automobiles.
As we wade deeper into the literature, we stumble upon a treasure trove of non-fiction works that shed light on the intricate dance between politics and automotive safety. Titles such as "Risk and Regulation of Automotive Airbags" and "The Political Economy of Vehicle Safety" beckon us with promises of knowledge, albeit without the guarantee of comedic relief.
But fear not, for we must not overlook the fictional realm, where the lines between reality and absurdity are delightfully blurred. Literary classics like "The Car Candidate" and "Airbags and Anarchy" tantalize us with the prospect of weaving political intrigue into the fabric of automotive dramas. And who could forget the gripping tale of "The Airbag Conspiracy," where political machinations collide with vehicular perils in a nail-biting narrative?
Venturing beyond the confines of printed matter, we widen our scope to glean insights from the small screen. TV shows such as "Political Wheels" and "Airbags & Elections" offer both entertainment and potential research fodder, as we glean a lighthearted understanding of the intricate relationship between political choices and automotive safety.
As we navigate through this literature review, we can't help but marvel at the kaleidoscope of perspectives and, dare we say, the sheer serendipity of uncovering such an unconventional nexus. While we may not have all the answers, our endeavor promises to infuse scholarly rigor with a healthy dose of levity, making for a scholarly journey that defies convention and embraces the delight of unexpected connections.
[[RESULTS]]
The statistical analysis of the data revealed a remarkably strong correlation between the number of votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in Virginia and automotive recalls for issues with the airbags. Our research employed data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US Department of Transportation to uncover this unexpected connection.
We found a correlation coefficient of 0.9925511, indicating a nearly perfect linear relationship between the two variables. The r-squared value of 0.9851576 further confirmed the robustness of this correlation, suggesting that over 98.5% of the variation in automotive recalls for airbag issues could be explained by the number of votes for the Libertarian candidate in Virginia. As if that weren't enough, the p-value was less than 0.01, solidifying the statistical significance of our findings.
Fig. 1 provides a visual representation of this striking correlation, with the scatterplot resembling two peas in a political pod. The strong linear trend depicted in the figure would make even the most seasoned statistician raise an eyebrow in amazement. It's almost as if the airbags are inflating and deflating in sync with the ebb and flow of political preferences – a spectacle that could rival any synchronized swimming routine at the Olympic Games.
In conclusion, our results not only reveal a compelling correlation between the number of votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in Virginia and automotive recalls for issues with airbags, but they also challenge conventional wisdom about the seemingly disparate worlds of politics and vehicular safety. This research opens the door to a myriad of questions and implications, sparking curiosity and amusement in equal measure. Whether you're a data enthusiast, a political pundit, or simply someone with an appreciation for the delightfully unexpected, our findings are sure to captivate and entertain.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[DISCUSSION]]
ChatGPT:
[[DISCUSSION]]
Our results confirm and extend the prior research conducted by Smith et al. and Doe and Jones, who also observed a significant positive correlation between Libertarian votes in Virginia and automotive recalls for airbag issues. Like a well-choreographed dance, our findings seamlessly interlock with these earlier studies, emphasizing the robustness and remarkably strong nature of this correlation. It's as if the political realm and automotive safety have orchestrated a symphony of statistical significance, leaving us in awe of the intricate steps of this unlikely tango.
The nearly perfect linear relationship we uncovered between the variables aligns with the whimsical musings of literary works such as "The Car Candidate" and "Airbags and Anarchy," where the melding of politics and automotive intrigue dances across the pages. But here, in our scholarly pursuit, the dance has materialized into a statistical waltz that defies expectations and incites both scholarly pondering and lighthearted amusement. As we ponder this unexpected connection, we can't help but imagine the airbags themselves casting votes in a ballot box, perhaps expressing their longing for proper inflation and deflation protocols – a notion that would surely strike a chord with automotive enthusiasts and political pundits alike.
This correlation opens the floodgates to a myriad of inquiries. Could political ideologies influence not only the electorate but also the very fabric of automotive safety? Are airbags a silent voice in the political symphony, responding to the pulse of ideological shifts with an enigmatic ballet of inflating and deflating? These questions beckon us to unravel the perplexing web of interconnections between the ballot box and the airbag module, teasing us with the promise of uncovering hidden harmonies within this unlikely orchestra.
As we gaze upon Fig. 1, the scatterplot represents a visual spectacle that rivals any theatrical performance. The two variables, like old friends meeting at a high school reunion, display a familiarity and cohesion that defy conventional boundaries. It's akin to watching a buddy cop movie where the mismatched duo eventually find common ground and solve the case – although in this instance, the case revolves around the coalescence of political choice and automotive safety.
Our research, much like the TV shows "Political Wheels" and "Airbags & Elections," offers both scholarly insight and potential entertainment value, seamlessly blending the gravity of statistical analysis with the levity of unexpected connections. Our journey through this nexus of libertarian votes and airbag recalls has not only expanded the frontiers of knowledge but also tickled the funny bone of academia, proving that even the most unconventional relationships can foster both enlightenment and amusement.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.You draft the discussion section of goofy academic research papers that sounds like it belongs based on the title and abstract provided.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Virginia and Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags. Make lots of 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]]
Air Bags vs Ballots: An Unexpected Connection Between Libertarian Votes in Virginia and Automotive Recalls
[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we unveil an unlikely correlation between the number of votes cast for the Libertarian presidential candidate in Virginia and automotive recalls for issues with the airbags. Our research, employing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US Department of Transportation, aimed to shed light on this unconventional relationship. With a correlation coefficient of 0.9925511 and statistically significant p-value (p < 0.01) spanning the period from 1990 to 2020, the evidence is compelling.
While delving into this perplexing phenomenon, our findings led us down a rabbit hole of unexpected twists and turns. Who would have thought that the political preferences of Virginians would intertwine with the safety features of their automobiles? As we dug deeper, we couldn't help but make jokes about "airing out" political differences and the "deflation" of libertarian support coinciding with automotive recalls.
Our research raises more questions than it answers, inviting further investigation into the mysterious interplay between political choices and automotive safety. In the meantime, whether you're a political pundit or an automotive enthusiast, this paper is sure to offer a refreshing blend of statistical analysis and whimsical observations.
[[INTRDUCTION]]
Politics and automotive safety – two subjects that, at first glance, seem about as related as a pineapple and a bicycle. Yet, as we delve into the world of statistical analysis and peculiar correlations, we find ourselves in the midst of a phenomenon that could make even the most seasoned researcher do a double-take. Yes, we're talking about the unexpected connection between votes cast for Libertarian presidential candidates in Virginia and automotive recalls for issues with airbags. This paper aims to shed light on this bizarre correlation, and to do so with equal parts gravitas and whimsy.
At the crossroads of politics and vehicular safety, lies a web of data that leaves us scratching our heads and reaching for our most perplexed emoji. Who would have thought that the political preferences of Virginians could be intertwined with the functionality of airbags in their beloved automobiles? This study sets out to explore this conundrum, armed with a bounty of data from reputable sources and a healthy dose of good humor.
As we embarked on this research endeavor, we couldn't help but chuckle at the irony of political "hot air" potentially impacting the literal hot air in automotive safety mechanisms. Yet, behind the puns and the quirks, our findings unveiled a correlation coefficient of 0.9925511 and a statistically significant p-value (p < 0.01) spanning over three decades. We are simultaneously astounded and tickled by the weight of our own findings – a sensation akin to discovering a clown car in a parallel parking space.
While this paper presents a serious attempt to unravel this enigmatic relationship, we must confess that it also offers a refreshing blend of statistical analysis and whimsical observations. So, whether you're a political pundit, an automotive enthusiast, or just someone who enjoys the occasional statistical intrigue, buckle up for a ride that promises to be both informative and delightfully amusing.
[[RESULTS]]
The statistical analysis of the data revealed a remarkably strong correlation between the number of votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in Virginia and automotive recalls for issues with the airbags. Our research employed data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US Department of Transportation to uncover this unexpected connection.
We found a correlation coefficient of 0.9925511, indicating a nearly perfect linear relationship between the two variables. The r-squared value of 0.9851576 further confirmed the robustness of this correlation, suggesting that over 98.5% of the variation in automotive recalls for airbag issues could be explained by the number of votes for the Libertarian candidate in Virginia. As if that weren't enough, the p-value was less than 0.01, solidifying the statistical significance of our findings.
Fig. 1 provides a visual representation of this striking correlation, with the scatterplot resembling two peas in a political pod. The strong linear trend depicted in the figure would make even the most seasoned statistician raise an eyebrow in amazement. It's almost as if the airbags are inflating and deflating in sync with the ebb and flow of political preferences – a spectacle that could rival any synchronized swimming routine at the Olympic Games.
In conclusion, our results not only reveal a compelling correlation between the number of votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in Virginia and automotive recalls for issues with airbags, but they also challenge conventional wisdom about the seemingly disparate worlds of politics and vehicular safety. This research opens the door to a myriad of questions and implications, sparking curiosity and amusement in equal measure. Whether you're a data enthusiast, a political pundit, or simply someone with an appreciation for the delightfully unexpected, our findings are sure to captivate and entertain.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[CONCLUSION]]
ChatGPT:
[[CONCLUSION]]
In conclusion, our research has unveiled a correlation so strong, it could make even the most unflappable statistician blow a gasket. The nearly perfect linear relationship between votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in Virginia and automotive recalls for airbag issues has left us simultaneously astounded and tickled – like discovering a dancing gopher in your car's glove compartment.
Fig. 1 paints a picture of synchronicity between political leanings and automotive safety that rivals the most coordinated flash mob. It's as if the airbags are saying, "We're all in this together," alongside the political preferences of Virginians. Who knew that the world of politics could inflate and deflate airbag issues with such precision?
As we wrap up this wild ride of statistical analysis and whimsical revelations, it's clear that our findings raise more questions than they answer. We couldn't help but chuckle at the thought of political "hot air" potentially impacting the literal hot air in automotive safety mechanisms. But behind the puns and the quirks, lies a serious call for further investigation into this peculiar relationship.
However, in the immortal words of a well-known philosopher (okay, it's Cher), "If I could turn back time," I wouldn't, because no more research is needed in this area. We have fulfilled our duty to science and humor, leaving the world with a puzzle that is as confounding as it is entertaining. So, whether you're a data enthusiast, a political pundit, or just someone who enjoys a good statistical romp, we hope our findings have provided both enlightenment and a good chuckle. And remember, always buckle up – in politics and in cars!
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 Air Bags vs Ballots: An Unexpected Connection Between Libertarian Votes in Virginia and Automotive Recalls. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.
ChatGPT:
The Journal of Quirky Social Science Research
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 Air Bags vs Ballots: An Unexpected Connection Between Libertarian Votes in Virginia and Automotive Recalls. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.
ChatGPT:
The Institute for Quirky Societal Studies
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide potential search keywords separated by commas. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide potential search keywords for a paper titled Air Bags vs Ballots: An Unexpected Connection Between Libertarian Votes in Virginia and Automotive Recalls with an abstract of In this paper, we unveil an unlikely correlation between the number of votes cast for the Libertarian presidential candidate in Virginia and automotive recalls for issues with the airbags. Our research, employing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US Department of Transportation, aimed to shed light on this unconventional relationship. With a correlation coefficient of 0.9925511 and statistically significant p-value (p < 0.01) spanning the period from 1990 to 2020, the evidence is compelling.
While delving into this perplexing phenomenon, our findings led us down a rabbit hole of unexpected twists and turns. Who would have thought that the political preferences of Virginians would intertwine with the safety features of their automobiles? As we dug deeper, we couldn't help but make jokes about "airing out" political differences and the "deflation" of libertarian support coinciding with automotive recalls.
Our research raises more questions than it answers, inviting further investigation into the mysterious interplay between political choices and automotive safety. In the meantime, whether you're a political pundit or an automotive enthusiast, this paper is sure to offer a refreshing blend of statistical analysis and whimsical observations.
ChatGPT:
Libertarian votes, Virginia, automotive recalls, airbags, correlation, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, US Department of Transportation, political preferences, safety features, correlation coefficient, statistical significance, 1990-2020, political choices, research, statistical analysis
*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 the Libertarian Presidential candidate in VirginiaDetailed data title: Percentage of all votes cast for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Virginia
Source: MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse
See what else correlates with Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Virginia
Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags
Source: US DOT
See what else correlates with Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags
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 = 0.9851576 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 98.5% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Virginia) over the 8 years from 1990 through 2020.
p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 1.03E-6. 0.0000010275290288364585000000
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 0.99 in 0.000103% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 973,209 random variables You don't actually need 973 thousand variables to find a correlation like this one. I don't have that many variables in my database. You can also correlate variables that are not independent. I do this a lot.
p-value calculations are useful for understanding the probability of a result happening by chance. They are most useful when used to highlight the risk of a fluke outcome. For example, if you calculate a p-value of 0.30, the risk that the result is a fluke is high. It is good to know that! But there are lots of ways to get a p-value of less than 0.01, as evidenced by this project.
In this particular case, the values are so extreme as to be meaningless. That's why no one reports p-values with specificity after they drop below 0.01.
Just to be clear: I'm being completely transparent about the calculations. There is no math trickery. This is just how statistics shakes out when you calculate hundreds of millions of random correlations.
with the same 7 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 7 because we have two variables measured over a period of 8 years. It's just the number of years minus ( the number of variables minus one ), which in this case simplifies to the number of years minus one.
you would randomly expect to find a correlation as strong as this one.
[ 0.96, 1 ] 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.
1992 | 1996 | 2000 | 2004 | 2008 | 2012 | 2016 | 2020 | |
Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Virginia (Percentage of votes) | 0.223904 | 0.379618 | 0.554784 | 0.345245 | 0.29724 | 0.809861 | 2.96966 | 1.45187 |
Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags (Recalls) | 4 | 8 | 15 | 14 | 13 | 23 | 106 | 58 |
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. - Very low n: There are not many data points included in this analysis. Even if the p-value is high, we should be suspicious of using so few datapoints in a correlation.
Try it yourself
You can calculate the values on this page on your own! Try running the Python code to see the calculation results. 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([0.223904,0.379618,0.554784,0.345245,0.29724,0.809861,2.96966,1.45187,])
array_2 = np.array([4,8,15,14,13,23,106,58,])
array_1_name = "Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Virginia"
array_2_name = "Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags"
# 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 the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Virginia
- Line chart for only Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags
- AI-generated correlation image
- The spurious research paper: Air Bags vs Ballots: An Unexpected Connection Between Libertarian Votes in Virginia and Automotive Recalls
Your rating is stellar!
Correlation ID: 4445 · Black Variable ID: 26182 · Red Variable ID: 1105