Download png, svg
AI explanation
As the Republican votes sizzled up in Alabama, it created a real Red-Hot political climate. This, in turn, sparked a Wiener-takes-all mentality among the Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion, leading to a surge in their hotdog consumption. The connection? It seems like when it comes to politics and competitive eating, there's just too much at stake to ketchup on any opportunity.
Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Create an image featuring a Polaroid photo-style scene. In the foreground, a group of people is gathered around a voting booth in Alabama, casting their votes for a Republican Presidential candidate. In the background, a billboard proudly displays the number of hotdogs consumed by the Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion. The champion himself is depicted enjoying a sky-high pile of hotdogs next to the billboard. The air is filled with the scent of grilling hotdogs and the bustling political activity seems to energize the champion, who appears determined to claim the title in a wiener-takes-all 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 Republican Presidential candidate in Alabama and Hotdogs consumed by Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion. 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: Data cyber art Steampunk Sci-fi fantacy a Polaroid photo Low poly
ChatGPT: a Polaroid photo
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 Republican Presidential candidate in Alabama and Hotdogs consumed by Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion, in the following situation: As the Republican votes sizzled up in Alabama, it created a real Red-Hot political climate. This, in turn, sparked a Wiener-takes-all mentality among the Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion, leading to a surge in their hotdog consumption. The connection? It seems like when it comes to politics and competitive eating, there's just too much at stake to ketchup on any opportunity.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a sizzling scene in Alabama, a group of people are seen casting their votes for the Republican Presidential candidate. As the votes are being counted, a nearby billboard proudly displays the number of hotdogs consumed by the Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion, and the champion himself can be seen enjoying a sky-high pile of hotdogs. The scent of grilling hotdogs fills the air, adding to the red-hot political climate. The bustling activity at the voting booth seems to energize the champion, who appears determined to claim the title in a wiener-takes-all manner.
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 Polaroid photo ] and depicting this scene: In a sizzling scene in Alabama, a group of people are seen casting their votes for the Republican Presidential candidate. As the votes are being counted, a nearby billboard proudly displays the number of hotdogs consumed by the Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion, and the champion himself can be seen enjoying a sky-high pile of hotdogs. The scent of grilling hotdogs fills the air, adding to the red-hot political climate. The bustling activity at the voting booth seems to energize the champion, who appears determined to claim the title in a wiener-takes-all manner. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Create an image featuring a Polaroid photo-style scene. In the foreground, a group of people is gathered around a voting booth in Alabama, casting their votes for a Republican Presidential candidate. In the background, a billboard proudly displays the number of hotdogs consumed by the Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion. The champion himself is depicted enjoying a sky-high pile of hotdogs next to the billboard. The air is filled with the scent of grilling hotdogs and the bustling political activity seems to energize the champion, who appears determined to claim the title in a wiener-takes-all 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 Republican Presidential candidate in Alabama caused Hotdogs consumed by Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion to increase. Include one good pun.
AI academic paper
 |
Making a Link Between Republican Votes in Alabama and Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Contest: A Wiener Takes All Approach The Journal of Political Gastronomy Jan 2024 Reminder: This paper is AI-generated. Not real! |
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly researcher writing an academic paper.You write titles and abstracts of goofy academic research papers.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, and add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Alabama and Hotdogs consumed by Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.
Make the title punny if you can come up with clever pun. If not, just make it sound clever.
Your research team used data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and Wikipedia to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9642099 and p < 0.01 for 1979 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]]
"Making a Link Between Republican Votes in Alabama and Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Contest: A Wiener Takes All Approach"
[[ABSTRACT]]
The relationship between political voting patterns and competitive eating is one that has rarely been explored, perhaps due to the general incredulity that the two could ever be connected. However, our research delves deep into this seemingly unconventional pairing and uncovers a surprising connection. Through an extensive data analysis using information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Wikipedia, we have uncovered a statistically significant correlation between votes for the Republican presidential candidate in Alabama and the number of hotdogs consumed by the champion of Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition. Our correlation coefficient of 0.9642099 and p < 0.01 for the years 1979 to 2020 presents a compelling argument for the strong association between these seemingly unrelated events.
The implications of this correlation are profound and offer insight into the potential influence of political preferences on dietary habits. Our findings suggest that there may be a connection between the political leanings of a region and the competitive eating prowess of its residents - a notion that, while initially amusing, merits further investigation. As the saying goes, "you are what you vote and eat" – with a nod to both democracy and deli meats, our research highlights the quirky ways in which various aspects of life may intertwine.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly researcher writing an academic paper.You draft the introduction section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Alabama and Hotdogs consumed by Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.
Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Making a Link Between Republican Votes in Alabama and Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Contest: A Wiener Takes All Approach"
[[ABSTRACT]]
The relationship between political voting patterns and competitive eating is one that has rarely been explored, perhaps due to the general incredulity that the two could ever be connected. However, our research delves deep into this seemingly unconventional pairing and uncovers a surprising connection. Through an extensive data analysis using information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Wikipedia, we have uncovered a statistically significant correlation between votes for the Republican presidential candidate in Alabama and the number of hotdogs consumed by the champion of Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition. Our correlation coefficient of 0.9642099 and p < 0.01 for the years 1979 to 2020 presents a compelling argument for the strong association between these seemingly unrelated events.
The implications of this correlation are profound and offer insight into the potential influence of political preferences on dietary habits. Our findings suggest that there may be a connection between the political leanings of a region and the competitive eating prowess of its residents - a notion that, while initially amusing, merits further investigation. As the saying goes, "you are what you vote and eat" – with a nod to both democracy and deli meats, our research highlights the quirky ways in which various aspects of life may intertwine.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
As Wernher von Braun once famously said, "To conquer the universe, Nathan's Famous Hot Dog Eating Contest and political voting patterns might be the final frontier." Indeed, our research embarks on an odyssey through uncharted territory, seeking to unravel the enigmatic relationship between votes for the Republican presidential candidate in Alabama and the astonishing feats of hot dog consumption at the renowned Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition.
This investigation sheds light on a correlation that, at first blush, might seem as improbable as a hot dog without mustard – but, as it turns out, statistics are the ketchup of science, adding flavor and intrigue to unexpected findings. Our study encompasses data from 1979 to 2020, presenting a correlation coefficient as striking as the snap of a hot dog casing, with a p-value so low, it's practically subterranean.
The relationship between political preferences and competitive eating habits may at first appear as unlikely as a hot dog topping bar at a polling station – yet, as our research unfolds, it becomes evident that these seemingly disparate realms converge in a compelling manner. Our findings underscore the oft-overlooked adage that, in the grand buffet of life, politics and palate may share more than just the letter 'P.'
Consequently, with the confidence of a hot dog aficionado at a condiment station, we delve into the implications of this correlation, opening the door to a veritable smorgasbord of impactful revelations. Our data-driven odyssey champions the notion that, much like the hot dog, the connection between voting behavior and competitive eating prowess may be more than meets the bun.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly researcher writing an academic paper.You draft a literature review section of an academic research paper, that starts out dry for the first few sentences but then becomes hilarious and goofy.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Alabama and Hotdogs consumed by Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.
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 you might move on to cartoons and children's shows that you watched for research.
Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Making a Link Between Republican Votes in Alabama and Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Contest: A Wiener Takes All Approach"
[[ABSTRACT]]
The relationship between political voting patterns and competitive eating is one that has rarely been explored, perhaps due to the general incredulity that the two could ever be connected. However, our research delves deep into this seemingly unconventional pairing and uncovers a surprising connection. Through an extensive data analysis using information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Wikipedia, we have uncovered a statistically significant correlation between votes for the Republican presidential candidate in Alabama and the number of hotdogs consumed by the champion of Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition. Our correlation coefficient of 0.9642099 and p < 0.01 for the years 1979 to 2020 presents a compelling argument for the strong association between these seemingly unrelated events.
The implications of this correlation are profound and offer insight into the potential influence of political preferences on dietary habits. Our findings suggest that there may be a connection between the political leanings of a region and the competitive eating prowess of its residents - a notion that, while initially amusing, merits further investigation. As the saying goes, "you are what you vote and eat" – with a nod to both democracy and deli meats, our research highlights the quirky ways in which various aspects of life may intertwine.
-------
And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
As Wernher von Braun once famously said, "To conquer the universe, Nathan's Famous Hot Dog Eating Contest and political voting patterns might be the final frontier." Indeed, our research embarks on an odyssey through uncharted territory, seeking to unravel the enigmatic relationship between votes for the Republican presidential candidate in Alabama and the astonishing feats of hot dog consumption at the renowned Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition.
This investigation sheds light on a correlation that, at first blush, might seem as improbable as a hot dog without mustard – but, as it turns out, statistics are the ketchup of science, adding flavor and intrigue to unexpected findings. Our study encompasses data from 1979 to 2020, presenting a correlation coefficient as striking as the snap of a hot dog casing, with a p-value so low, it's practically subterranean.
The relationship between political preferences and competitive eating habits may at first appear as unlikely as a hot dog topping bar at a polling station – yet, as our research unfolds, it becomes evident that these seemingly disparate realms converge in a compelling manner. Our findings underscore the oft-overlooked adage that, in the grand buffet of life, politics and palate may share more than just the letter 'P.'
Consequently, with the confidence of a hot dog aficionado at a condiment station, we delve into the implications of this correlation, opening the door to a veritable smorgasbord of impactful revelations. Our data-driven odyssey champions the notion that, much like the hot dog, the connection between voting behavior and competitive eating prowess may be more than meets the bun.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
In "The Republican Votes and Dietary Preferences: A Statistical Analysis" by Smith et al., the authors find a surprising positive correlation between the number of votes for the Republican presidential candidate in Alabama and the consumption of hotdogs at various competitive eating events. This initial study piques our curiosity and sets the stage for further exploration into the connection between political affiliations and gastronomic feats.
"Hot Dog Nation: A Relishable History" by Bruce Kraig and "Sausage: A Global History" by Gary Allen delve into the cultural significance of hot dogs, shedding light on the symbolic and social aspects of this beloved American food. While their works may not directly address the correlation between political voting patterns and competitive eating, they offer valuable context for understanding the larger implications of our findings.
On the fictional front, "The Curious Case of the Correlating Canines" by Agatha Christie and "The Hound of the Baskervilles" by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle provide a whimsical take on improbable connections and mysterious associations. While these works may be unrelated to our topic, they inspire a sense of intrigue and serendipity that resonates with our own unexpected findings.
Additionally, cartoons such as "Scooby-Doo" and children's shows like "Blue's Clues" serve as delightful sources of inspiration, reminding us that uncovering seemingly unlikely connections can be as entertaining as solving a mystery with a beloved canine companion by our side.
As we navigate this uncharted territory of statistical analysis and gourmet indulgence, the evidence we uncover may prompt skeptics to exclaim, "That's quite the sausage surprise!" Yet, with our data-driven approach and light-hearted perspective, we endeavor to reveal the relishable truth behind this unexpected correlation.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly researcher writing an academic paper.You draft the methodology section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Alabama and Hotdogs consumed by Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.
Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and Wikipedia . You used data from 1979 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]]
"Making a Link Between Republican Votes in Alabama and Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Contest: A Wiener Takes All Approach"
[[ABSTRACT]]
The relationship between political voting patterns and competitive eating is one that has rarely been explored, perhaps due to the general incredulity that the two could ever be connected. However, our research delves deep into this seemingly unconventional pairing and uncovers a surprising connection. Through an extensive data analysis using information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Wikipedia, we have uncovered a statistically significant correlation between votes for the Republican presidential candidate in Alabama and the number of hotdogs consumed by the champion of Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition. Our correlation coefficient of 0.9642099 and p < 0.01 for the years 1979 to 2020 presents a compelling argument for the strong association between these seemingly unrelated events.
The implications of this correlation are profound and offer insight into the potential influence of political preferences on dietary habits. Our findings suggest that there may be a connection between the political leanings of a region and the competitive eating prowess of its residents - a notion that, while initially amusing, merits further investigation. As the saying goes, "you are what you vote and eat" – with a nod to both democracy and deli meats, our research highlights the quirky ways in which various aspects of life may intertwine.
[[INTRODUCTION]]
As Wernher von Braun once famously said, "To conquer the universe, Nathan's Famous Hot Dog Eating Contest and political voting patterns might be the final frontier." Indeed, our research embarks on an odyssey through uncharted territory, seeking to unravel the enigmatic relationship between votes for the Republican presidential candidate in Alabama and the astonishing feats of hot dog consumption at the renowned Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition.
This investigation sheds light on a correlation that, at first blush, might seem as improbable as a hot dog without mustard – but, as it turns out, statistics are the ketchup of science, adding flavor and intrigue to unexpected findings. Our study encompasses data from 1979 to 2020, presenting a correlation coefficient as striking as the snap of a hot dog casing, with a p-value so low, it's practically subterranean.
The relationship between political preferences and competitive eating habits may at first appear as unlikely as a hot dog topping bar at a polling station – yet, as our research unfolds, it becomes evident that these seemingly disparate realms converge in a compelling manner. Our findings underscore the oft-overlooked adage that, in the grand buffet of life, politics and palate may share more than just the letter 'P.'
Consequently, with the confidence of a hot dog aficionado at a condiment station, we delve into the implications of this correlation, opening the door to a veritable smorgasbord of impactful revelations. Our data-driven odyssey champions the notion that, much like the hot dog, the connection between voting behavior and competitive eating prowess may be more than meets the bun.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
ChatGPT:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
To uncover the elusive link between votes for the Republican presidential candidate in Alabama and the consumption of hotdogs by the champion of Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition, our research employed a combination of data mining, statistical analysis, and a healthy dose of skepticism (which, in this case, is the opposite of a healthy dose of hotdogs).
First, we scoured various reputable sources such as MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Wikipedia - essentially traversing the data landscape like hot dog eating contestants racing to devour their wieners. Our expansive dataset spanned from 1979 to 2020, providing a feast of information akin to a smorgasbord of hot dog toppings.
To quantify the relationship between the two seemingly unrelated variables, we performed a series of correlation analyses. Like a diligent hot dog connoisseur inspecting the integrity of a bun, we meticulously scrutinized the Republican votes in Alabama and the numbers of hotdogs consumed by Nathan's champion, employing mathematical techniques to reveal patterns that may initially appear as indiscernible as finding a single frankfurter in a mound of sauerkraut.
Employing statistical software fit for a champion, we calculated the correlation coefficient, which emerged as substantial as a hot dog bun's ability to cradle its meaty contents. While we can't quite relish in causation, the results we obtained were certainly compelling enough to pique the curiosity of even the most skeptical hot dog skeptic.
In an attempt to fortify our findings, we also performed regression analyses to explore potential predictors and additional variables that may mediate or moderate the relationship between political voting preferences and competitive hot dog consumption. It's safe to say that our statistical endeavors were as intricate as untangling a particularly knotty hot dog eating contest controversy.
Furthermore, we exercised caution in considering potential confounding variables, such as regional dietary preferences and political affiliations, to ensure that our findings were not skewed by extraneous factors. After all, we wanted to avoid letting any red herrings sneak into our hot dog bun of inquiry, as entertaining as they may be at a backyard barbeque.
Lastly, our research team also conducted a thorough review of existing literature, analyzing previous studies on voting behaviors and dietary choices. This process involved combing through academic papers like a meticulous condiment selection, ensuring that the mustard of our methodology had just the right blend of tanginess and scholarly rigor.
In summary, our research methodology combined the precision of a hot dog eating competition judge with the scrutiny of a seasoned statistician, allowing us to unearth the surprising and statistically robust connection between votes for the Republican presidential candidate in Alabama and the prodigious consumption of hotdogs. It's safe to say that, in the realm of research endeavors, our inquiry was as much of a whirlwind as a competitive eating contest, yet with significantly fewer calories.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly researcher writing an academic paper.You draft the results section of an academic research paper. You speak in the past tense (you found...).
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Alabama and Hotdogs consumed by Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.
Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and Wikipedia .
For the time period 1979 to 2020, you found a correlation 0.9642099, r-squared of 0.9297008, 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]]
"Making a Link Between Republican Votes in Alabama and Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Contest: A Wiener Takes All Approach"
[[ABSTRACT]]
The relationship between political voting patterns and competitive eating is one that has rarely been explored, perhaps due to the general incredulity that the two could ever be connected. However, our research delves deep into this seemingly unconventional pairing and uncovers a surprising connection. Through an extensive data analysis using information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Wikipedia, we have uncovered a statistically significant correlation between votes for the Republican presidential candidate in Alabama and the number of hotdogs consumed by the champion of Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition. Our correlation coefficient of 0.9642099 and p < 0.01 for the years 1979 to 2020 presents a compelling argument for the strong association between these seemingly unrelated events.
The implications of this correlation are profound and offer insight into the potential influence of political preferences on dietary habits. Our findings suggest that there may be a connection between the political leanings of a region and the competitive eating prowess of its residents - a notion that, while initially amusing, merits further investigation. As the saying goes, "you are what you vote and eat" – with a nod to both democracy and deli meats, our research highlights the quirky ways in which various aspects of life may intertwine.
-------
And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
As Wernher von Braun once famously said, "To conquer the universe, Nathan's Famous Hot Dog Eating Contest and political voting patterns might be the final frontier." Indeed, our research embarks on an odyssey through uncharted territory, seeking to unravel the enigmatic relationship between votes for the Republican presidential candidate in Alabama and the astonishing feats of hot dog consumption at the renowned Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition.
This investigation sheds light on a correlation that, at first blush, might seem as improbable as a hot dog without mustard – but, as it turns out, statistics are the ketchup of science, adding flavor and intrigue to unexpected findings. Our study encompasses data from 1979 to 2020, presenting a correlation coefficient as striking as the snap of a hot dog casing, with a p-value so low, it's practically subterranean.
The relationship between political preferences and competitive eating habits may at first appear as unlikely as a hot dog topping bar at a polling station – yet, as our research unfolds, it becomes evident that these seemingly disparate realms converge in a compelling manner. Our findings underscore the oft-overlooked adage that, in the grand buffet of life, politics and palate may share more than just the letter 'P.'
Consequently, with the confidence of a hot dog aficionado at a condiment station, we delve into the implications of this correlation, opening the door to a veritable smorgasbord of impactful revelations. Our data-driven odyssey champions the notion that, much like the hot dog, the connection between voting behavior and competitive eating prowess may be more than meets the bun.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[RESULTS]]
ChatGPT:
[[RESULTS]]
The results of our research revealed a remarkably strong correlation between the percentage of votes for the Republican presidential candidate in Alabama and the number of hotdogs consumed by the champion of Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition. For the period of 1979 to 2020, we found a correlation coefficient of 0.9642099, indicating a near-perfect positive linear relationship between the two variables. This correlation coefficient is as impressive as finding the mustard to complement a hot dog – it simply cannot be ignored.
The r-squared value of 0.9297008 further emphasizes the robustness of the relationship, suggesting that a staggering 92.97% of the variation in hot dog consumption can be explained by the percentage of Republican votes in Alabama. This level of explanatory power is reminiscent of a powerful political speech, leaving little room for skepticism.
As for the statistical significance, our findings boasted a p-value of < 0.01, reinforcing the strength of the association between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. This level of statistical significance is as rare as a vegetarian at a hot dog eating competition – providing strong evidence to support the link between political preferences and competitive eating prowess.
Furthermore, to visually encapsulate this compelling relationship, we present Figure 1, a scatterplot that graphically depicts the strong positive correlation between the two variables. The data points are as tightly packed as sausages in a hot dog bun, illustrating the undeniable connection between Republican votes in Alabama and competitive hot dog consumption.
In summary, our results not only corroborate the existence of a substantial link between voting behavior and competitive eating feats but also highlight the potential influence of political preferences on dietary habits. This unexpected correlation serves as a potent reminder that in the intricate tapestry of human behavior, even the most unlikely pairings can sometimes blend together like ketchup and mustard on a hot dog.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly researcher writing an academic paper.You draft the discussion section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Alabama and Hotdogs consumed by Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.
Limit your response to 500 tokens.
Here are the title, abstract, literature review, and results sections. Please harken back to 1-2 of the goofy items in the literature review, but pretend to take them completely seriously. Discuss how your results supported the prior research.
Do not write a conclusion. I will add a conclusion after this.
[[TITLE]]
"Making a Link Between Republican Votes in Alabama and Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Contest: A Wiener Takes All Approach"
[[ABSTRACT]]
The relationship between political voting patterns and competitive eating is one that has rarely been explored, perhaps due to the general incredulity that the two could ever be connected. However, our research delves deep into this seemingly unconventional pairing and uncovers a surprising connection. Through an extensive data analysis using information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Wikipedia, we have uncovered a statistically significant correlation between votes for the Republican presidential candidate in Alabama and the number of hotdogs consumed by the champion of Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition. Our correlation coefficient of 0.9642099 and p < 0.01 for the years 1979 to 2020 presents a compelling argument for the strong association between these seemingly unrelated events.
The implications of this correlation are profound and offer insight into the potential influence of political preferences on dietary habits. Our findings suggest that there may be a connection between the political leanings of a region and the competitive eating prowess of its residents - a notion that, while initially amusing, merits further investigation. As the saying goes, "you are what you vote and eat" – with a nod to both democracy and deli meats, our research highlights the quirky ways in which various aspects of life may intertwine.
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
In "The Republican Votes and Dietary Preferences: A Statistical Analysis" by Smith et al., the authors find a surprising positive correlation between the number of votes for the Republican presidential candidate in Alabama and the consumption of hotdogs at various competitive eating events. This initial study piques our curiosity and sets the stage for further exploration into the connection between political affiliations and gastronomic feats.
"Hot Dog Nation: A Relishable History" by Bruce Kraig and "Sausage: A Global History" by Gary Allen delve into the cultural significance of hot dogs, shedding light on the symbolic and social aspects of this beloved American food. While their works may not directly address the correlation between political voting patterns and competitive eating, they offer valuable context for understanding the larger implications of our findings.
On the fictional front, "The Curious Case of the Correlating Canines" by Agatha Christie and "The Hound of the Baskervilles" by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle provide a whimsical take on improbable connections and mysterious associations. While these works may be unrelated to our topic, they inspire a sense of intrigue and serendipity that resonates with our own unexpected findings.
Additionally, cartoons such as "Scooby-Doo" and children's shows like "Blue's Clues" serve as delightful sources of inspiration, reminding us that uncovering seemingly unlikely connections can be as entertaining as solving a mystery with a beloved canine companion by our side.
As we navigate this uncharted territory of statistical analysis and gourmet indulgence, the evidence we uncover may prompt skeptics to exclaim, "That's quite the sausage surprise!" Yet, with our data-driven approach and light-hearted perspective, we endeavor to reveal the relishable truth behind this unexpected correlation.
[[RESULTS]]
The results of our research revealed a remarkably strong correlation between the percentage of votes for the Republican presidential candidate in Alabama and the number of hotdogs consumed by the champion of Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition. For the period of 1979 to 2020, we found a correlation coefficient of 0.9642099, indicating a near-perfect positive linear relationship between the two variables. This correlation coefficient is as impressive as finding the mustard to complement a hot dog – it simply cannot be ignored.
The r-squared value of 0.9297008 further emphasizes the robustness of the relationship, suggesting that a staggering 92.97% of the variation in hot dog consumption can be explained by the percentage of Republican votes in Alabama. This level of explanatory power is reminiscent of a powerful political speech, leaving little room for skepticism.
As for the statistical significance, our findings boasted a p-value of < 0.01, reinforcing the strength of the association between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. This level of statistical significance is as rare as a vegetarian at a hot dog eating competition – providing strong evidence to support the link between political preferences and competitive eating prowess.
Furthermore, to visually encapsulate this compelling relationship, we present Figure 1, a scatterplot that graphically depicts the strong positive correlation between the two variables. The data points are as tightly packed as sausages in a hot dog bun, illustrating the undeniable connection between Republican votes in Alabama and competitive hot dog consumption.
In summary, our results not only corroborate the existence of a substantial link between voting behavior and competitive eating feats but also highlight the potential influence of political preferences on dietary habits. This unexpected correlation serves as a potent reminder that in the intricate tapestry of human behavior, even the most unlikely pairings can sometimes blend together like ketchup and mustard on a hot dog.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[DISCUSSION]]
ChatGPT:
[[DISCUSSION]]
The results of our study provide compelling evidence supporting the hypothesis that there is a strong positive correlation between votes for the Republican presidential candidate in Alabama and the number of hotdogs consumed by the champion of Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition. As we explored this unique relationship, we couldn't help but relish in the humor of uncovering such surprising connections – it's almost as if the statistical analysis itself had a bit of "Wurst" sense of humor!
Our findings align with previous research by Smith et al., who also discovered a positive correlation between Republican votes and hotdog consumption. Well, isn't that a "frank" revelation! The fact that our results agreed with prior studies further reinforces the validity and reliability of this unexpected association, akin to finding the perfect combo of toppings for a ballpark hotdog.
In our literature review, we lightheartedly integrated whimsical influences from Agatha Christie's "The Curious Case of the Correlating Canines" and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's "The Hound of the Baskervilles." While these works may initially be perceived as unrelated, they do underscore the element of unexpected connections and serendipitous discoveries – much like the correlation we've revealed between political votes and competitive eating. As we navigate this unconventional territory of research, it's important to remember that sometimes, truth is indeed stranger than fiction!
Our correlation coefficient of 0.9642099 and an r-squared value of 0.9297008 unequivocally demonstrate the robustness and explanatory power of this correlation, much like an eloquent political speaker who leaves their audience captivated. The level of statistical significance, with a p-value of < 0.01, emphasizes the strength of this relationship, leaving little room for doubt – it's as rare as a tofu dog in a hotdog eating contest!
By visually representing the correlation in a scatterplot, we showcase the compelling connection between Republican votes in Alabama and competitive hot dog consumption. It's as visually compelling as a hot dog loaded with all the toppings!
Overall, our findings suggest that there is indeed a quirky interplay between political leanings and dietary habits. As we move forward, it's essential to continue exploring the offbeat implications of our research, and who knows, we may just uncover more surprising links that make us wonder, "What's the wurst that could happen?"
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly researcher writing an academic paper.You draft the discussion section of goofy academic research papers that sounds like it belongs based on the title and abstract provided.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Alabama and Hotdogs consumed by Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.
Limit your response to 300 tokens. At the very end, assert that no more research is needed in this area.
Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
"Making a Link Between Republican Votes in Alabama and Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Contest: A Wiener Takes All Approach"
[[ABSTRACT]]
The relationship between political voting patterns and competitive eating is one that has rarely been explored, perhaps due to the general incredulity that the two could ever be connected. However, our research delves deep into this seemingly unconventional pairing and uncovers a surprising connection. Through an extensive data analysis using information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Wikipedia, we have uncovered a statistically significant correlation between votes for the Republican presidential candidate in Alabama and the number of hotdogs consumed by the champion of Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition. Our correlation coefficient of 0.9642099 and p < 0.01 for the years 1979 to 2020 presents a compelling argument for the strong association between these seemingly unrelated events.
The implications of this correlation are profound and offer insight into the potential influence of political preferences on dietary habits. Our findings suggest that there may be a connection between the political leanings of a region and the competitive eating prowess of its residents - a notion that, while initially amusing, merits further investigation. As the saying goes, "you are what you vote and eat" – with a nod to both democracy and deli meats, our research highlights the quirky ways in which various aspects of life may intertwine.
[[INTRDUCTION]]
As Wernher von Braun once famously said, "To conquer the universe, Nathan's Famous Hot Dog Eating Contest and political voting patterns might be the final frontier." Indeed, our research embarks on an odyssey through uncharted territory, seeking to unravel the enigmatic relationship between votes for the Republican presidential candidate in Alabama and the astonishing feats of hot dog consumption at the renowned Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition.
This investigation sheds light on a correlation that, at first blush, might seem as improbable as a hot dog without mustard – but, as it turns out, statistics are the ketchup of science, adding flavor and intrigue to unexpected findings. Our study encompasses data from 1979 to 2020, presenting a correlation coefficient as striking as the snap of a hot dog casing, with a p-value so low, it's practically subterranean.
The relationship between political preferences and competitive eating habits may at first appear as unlikely as a hot dog topping bar at a polling station – yet, as our research unfolds, it becomes evident that these seemingly disparate realms converge in a compelling manner. Our findings underscore the oft-overlooked adage that, in the grand buffet of life, politics and palate may share more than just the letter 'P.'
Consequently, with the confidence of a hot dog aficionado at a condiment station, we delve into the implications of this correlation, opening the door to a veritable smorgasbord of impactful revelations. Our data-driven odyssey champions the notion that, much like the hot dog, the connection between voting behavior and competitive eating prowess may be more than meets the bun.
[[RESULTS]]
The results of our research revealed a remarkably strong correlation between the percentage of votes for the Republican presidential candidate in Alabama and the number of hotdogs consumed by the champion of Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition. For the period of 1979 to 2020, we found a correlation coefficient of 0.9642099, indicating a near-perfect positive linear relationship between the two variables. This correlation coefficient is as impressive as finding the mustard to complement a hot dog – it simply cannot be ignored.
The r-squared value of 0.9297008 further emphasizes the robustness of the relationship, suggesting that a staggering 92.97% of the variation in hot dog consumption can be explained by the percentage of Republican votes in Alabama. This level of explanatory power is reminiscent of a powerful political speech, leaving little room for skepticism.
As for the statistical significance, our findings boasted a p-value of < 0.01, reinforcing the strength of the association between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. This level of statistical significance is as rare as a vegetarian at a hot dog eating competition – providing strong evidence to support the link between political preferences and competitive eating prowess.
Furthermore, to visually encapsulate this compelling relationship, we present Figure 1, a scatterplot that graphically depicts the strong positive correlation between the two variables. The data points are as tightly packed as sausages in a hot dog bun, illustrating the undeniable connection between Republican votes in Alabama and competitive hot dog consumption.
In summary, our results not only corroborate the existence of a substantial link between voting behavior and competitive eating feats but also highlight the potential influence of political preferences on dietary habits. This unexpected correlation serves as a potent reminder that in the intricate tapestry of human behavior, even the most unlikely pairings can sometimes blend together like ketchup and mustard on a hot dog.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[CONCLUSION]]
ChatGPT:
[[CONCLUSION]]
In conclusion, our research has provided compelling evidence of a strong correlation between Republican votes in Alabama and the number of hotdogs consumed by the champion of Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition. This unexpected connection underscores the adage, "you are what you vote and eat," shedding light on the peculiar ways in which political preferences and dietary habits intertwine.
Our findings, as robust as a well-dressed hot dog, highlight the potential influence of politics on the competitive eating prowess of individuals. This correlation, with an r-squared value as satisfying as a perfectly grilled bratwurst, emphasizes the significant impact of political leanings on hot dog consumption.
The statistical significance of our results, as rare as a vegan at a barbecue, leaves little room for doubt regarding the strength of the association. The visually compelling scatterplot, as tightly packed as sausages in a bun, graphically illustrates the undeniable link between Republican votes in Alabama and hot dog consumption at the competition.
As a final thought, let's relish in the realization that sometimes the most unexpected pairings, much like ketchup and mustard on a hot dog, can come together in surprising ways. However, no more research is needed in this area; we've grilled this topic to perfection, and further investigation might just be overkilling it!
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 Making a Link Between Republican Votes in Alabama and Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Contest: A Wiener Takes All Approach. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.
ChatGPT:
The Journal of Political Gastronomy
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 Making a Link Between Republican Votes in Alabama and Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Contest: A Wiener Takes All Approach. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.
ChatGPT:
The Society for Competitive Eating Research and Analysis
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 Making a Link Between Republican Votes in Alabama and Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Contest: A Wiener Takes All Approach with an abstract of The relationship between political voting patterns and competitive eating is one that has rarely been explored, perhaps due to the general incredulity that the two could ever be connected. However, our research delves deep into this seemingly unconventional pairing and uncovers a surprising connection. Through an extensive data analysis using information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Wikipedia, we have uncovered a statistically significant correlation between votes for the Republican presidential candidate in Alabama and the number of hotdogs consumed by the champion of Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition. Our correlation coefficient of 0.9642099 and p < 0.01 for the years 1979 to 2020 presents a compelling argument for the strong association between these seemingly unrelated events.
The implications of this correlation are profound and offer insight into the potential influence of political preferences on dietary habits. Our findings suggest that there may be a connection between the political leanings of a region and the competitive eating prowess of its residents - a notion that, while initially amusing, merits further investigation. As the saying goes, "you are what you vote and eat" – with a nod to both democracy and deli meats, our research highlights the quirky ways in which various aspects of life may intertwine.
ChatGPT:
Republican votes, Alabama, Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Contest, political voting patterns, competitive eating, correlation analysis, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, statistical significance, correlation coefficient, dietary habits, political preferences, regional influence, competitive eating prowess
*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 Republican Presidential candidate in AlabamaDetailed data title: Total votes cast for the Republican Presidential candidate in Alabama
Source: MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse
See what else correlates with Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Alabama
Hotdogs consumed by Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion
Detailed data title: Hotdog Consumption by Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion
Source: Wikipedia
See what else correlates with Hotdogs consumed by Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion
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 = 0.9297008 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 93% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Hotdogs consumed by Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Alabama) over the 11 years from 1979 through 2020.
p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 1.7E-6. 0.0000017256026897305434000000
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 0.96 in 0.00017% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 579,508 random variables You don't actually need 579 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 10 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 10 because we have two variables measured over a period of 11 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.
[ 0.86, 0.99 ] 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 | 1984 | 1988 | 1992 | 1996 | 2000 | 2004 | 2008 | 2012 | 2016 | 2020 | |
| Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Alabama (Total votes) | 654192 | 872849 | 815576 | 804283 | 769044 | 941173 | 1176390 | 1266550 | 1255920 | 1318260 | 1441170 |
| Hotdogs consumed by Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion (Hotdogs eaten) | 9.5 | 9.5 | 10 | 19 | 22.25 | 25 | 53.33 | 59 | 68 | 70 | 75 |
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. - Y-axis doesn't start at zero: I truncated the Y-axes of the graph above. I also used a line graph, which makes the visual connection stand out more than it deserves.
Nothing against line graphs. They are great at telling a story when you have linear data! But visually it is deceptive because the only data is at the points on the graph, not the lines on the graph. In between each point, the data could have been doing anything. Like going for a random walk by itself!
Mathematically what I showed is true, but it is intentionally misleading. Below is the same chart but with both Y-axes starting at zero.
Try it yourself
You can calculate the values on this page on your own! Try running the Python code to see the calculation results. 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([654192,872849,815576,804283,769044,941173,1176390,1266550,1255920,1318260,1441170,])
array_2 = np.array([9.5,9.5,10,19,22.25,25,53.33,59,68,70,75,])
array_1_name = "Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Alabama"
array_2_name = "Hotdogs consumed by Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion"
# 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 Republican Presidential candidate in Alabama
- Line chart for only Hotdogs consumed by Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion
- AI-generated correlation image
- The spurious research paper: Making a Link Between Republican Votes in Alabama and Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Contest: A Wiener Takes All Approach
You're a rater extraordinaire!
Correlation ID: 4603 · Black Variable ID: 25947 · Red Variable ID: 500
