about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #4,658 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Nebraska and the second variable is Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags.  The chart goes from 1990 to 2020, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As more people embraced the idea of minimal government intervention, it inadvertently led to a laissez-faire attitude in the automotive industry. Without the usual regulations, the air bag manufacturers may have cut corners, leading to more recalls. It seems like even the cars were demanding their own form of autonomy!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Image Generation Prompt: Create an image that evokes the feeling of a vibrant "Discovery" magazine cover. Depict a line of cars waiting outside a polling station in Nebraska, with several drivers proudly displaying "Libertarian" bumper stickers. Show a nearby automotive factory with workers hurriedly inspecting air bags as a recall notice is announced, symbolizing a lack of regulation in the industry. The scene should illustrate the intersection of the growing support for the Libertarian candidate and the increasing automotive recalls related to air bag issues. Ensure the visual depiction is simple, with a focus on capturing the essence of discovery, politics, and automotive industry challenges in a single frame. 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 Nebraska 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: An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie Pop art Parallax art Surrealism 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 Nebraska and Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags, in the following situation: As more people embraced the idea of minimal government intervention, it inadvertently led to a laissez-faire attitude in the automotive industry. Without the usual regulations, the air bag manufacturers may have cut corners, leading to more recalls. It seems like even the cars were demanding their own form of autonomy!. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In Nebraska, a line of cars is seen waiting outside a polling station, with several drivers proudly displaying "Libertarian" bumper stickers. Meanwhile, in a nearby automotive factory, workers hurriedly inspect air bags as a recall notice is announced, symbolizing a lack of regulation in the industry. The scene illustrates the intersection of the growing support for the Libertarian candidate and the increasing automotive recalls related to air bag issues.

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: In Nebraska, a line of cars is seen waiting outside a polling station, with several drivers proudly displaying "Libertarian" bumper stickers. Meanwhile, in a nearby automotive factory, workers hurriedly inspect air bags as a recall notice is announced, symbolizing a lack of regulation in the industry. The scene illustrates the intersection of the growing support for the Libertarian candidate and the increasing automotive recalls related to air bag issues. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Image Generation Prompt: Create an image that evokes the feeling of a vibrant "Discovery" magazine cover. Depict a line of cars waiting outside a polling station in Nebraska, with several drivers proudly displaying "Libertarian" bumper stickers. Show a nearby automotive factory with workers hurriedly inspecting air bags as a recall notice is announced, symbolizing a lack of regulation in the industry. The scene should illustrate the intersection of the growing support for the Libertarian candidate and the increasing automotive recalls related to air bag issues. Ensure the visual depiction is simple, with a focus on capturing the essence of discovery, politics, and automotive industry challenges in a single frame.

*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.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 (fine-tuned)
System prompt: You provide humorous responses in the form of plausible sounding explanations for correlations. You assume the correlation is causative for the purpose of the explanation even if it is ridiculous. You do not chat with the user, you only reply with the causal connection explanation and nothing else.
User prompt: Please make up a funny explanation for how an increase in Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Nebraska caused Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags to increase. Make it feel plausible.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Libertarian Votes and Airbag Recalls in Nebraska: A Correlational Odyssey

The Journal of Unconventional Correlations

Jan 2024

Reminder: This paper is AI-generated. Not real!
Quick note: This sequence is long and repetitive. That's how the prompt engineering works for this one. I manage the output in Python to format it into this PDF.




Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a 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 Libertarian Presidential candidate in Nebraska and Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Rhyme words in the title.

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 0.9842790 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]]
Libertarian Votes and Airbag Recalls in Nebraska: A Correlational Odyssey

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper presents a rigorous analysis of the relationship between votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Nebraska and automotive recalls for issues with air bags. The data, sourced from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and US DOT, covers the period from 1990 to 2020. Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9842790 and p < 0.01, hinting at a compelling association between these seemingly disparate variables. We delve into the interplay of political inclinations and automotive safety features, unraveling a web of interconnected factors that leaves us pondering the curious dance of freedom and restraint. As we journey through this correlational odyssey, we emerge with an appreciation for the whimsical ways in which statistical analyses can illuminate the unlikeliest of connections. It is our hope that this research will provoke further inquiry and stimulate a chuckle or two among our esteemed colleagues in the academic realm.


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 Libertarian Presidential candidate in Nebraska and Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Libertarian Votes and Airbag Recalls in Nebraska: A Correlational Odyssey

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper presents a rigorous analysis of the relationship between votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Nebraska and automotive recalls for issues with air bags. The data, sourced from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and US DOT, covers the period from 1990 to 2020. Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9842790 and p < 0.01, hinting at a compelling association between these seemingly disparate variables. We delve into the interplay of political inclinations and automotive safety features, unraveling a web of interconnected factors that leaves us pondering the curious dance of freedom and restraint. As we journey through this correlational odyssey, we emerge with an appreciation for the whimsical ways in which statistical analyses can illuminate the unlikeliest of connections. It is our hope that this research will provoke further inquiry and stimulate a chuckle or two among our esteemed colleagues in the academic realm.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

In the realm of academic inquiry, the pursuit of knowledge often leads researchers down unexpected paths, unveiling hidden connections and casting light on the quirky intricacies of our world. Such is the case with the intriguing interplay between votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in the picturesque state of Nebraska and the sometimes unexpected deployment of air bags in automobiles. What could these seemingly incongruent phenomena have in common, you ask? A deep dive into the data reveals a tantalizing correlation that defies conventional wisdom and beckons us to explore the uncharted territory of statistical serendipity.

As we embark on this journey through the heartland of statistical analysis and automotive safety, we find ourselves in the midst of an unconventional partnership, one that dances between the precincts and the open road. The thorough examination of electoral choices and automotive recalls beckons us to consider the intersections of freedom, individuality, and the need for safety regulations, all under the watchful eye of the data gods. Our quest, therefore, is to unravel the web of interconnected variables that bind political leanings with vehicular safety features, and to illuminate the potential nuances lurking beneath the surface of this unlikely correlation.

Now, dear reader, prepare to be regaled with a tale of numbers and ballots, airbags and ideologies, as we tread the path less taken in the pursuit of knowledge and perhaps a touch of whimsy. We invite you to join us on this correlational odyssey, where the scenery is both unforeseen and unpredictable, and where the mundanity of numerical analyses takes on an air of unpredictability and levity. Let us delve into the heartland of Nebraska, where the winds of statistical significance blow alongside the plains of political idiosyncrasies, and where the safety of the masses mingles with the liberty of the individual.


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 Libertarian Presidential candidate in Nebraska and Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

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

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then cite some social media posts you read that seem to be related.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Libertarian Votes and Airbag Recalls in Nebraska: A Correlational Odyssey

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper presents a rigorous analysis of the relationship between votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Nebraska and automotive recalls for issues with air bags. The data, sourced from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and US DOT, covers the period from 1990 to 2020. Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9842790 and p < 0.01, hinting at a compelling association between these seemingly disparate variables. We delve into the interplay of political inclinations and automotive safety features, unraveling a web of interconnected factors that leaves us pondering the curious dance of freedom and restraint. As we journey through this correlational odyssey, we emerge with an appreciation for the whimsical ways in which statistical analyses can illuminate the unlikeliest of connections. It is our hope that this research will provoke further inquiry and stimulate a chuckle or two among our esteemed colleagues in the academic realm.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
In the realm of academic inquiry, the pursuit of knowledge often leads researchers down unexpected paths, unveiling hidden connections and casting light on the quirky intricacies of our world. Such is the case with the intriguing interplay between votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in the picturesque state of Nebraska and the sometimes unexpected deployment of air bags in automobiles. What could these seemingly incongruent phenomena have in common, you ask? A deep dive into the data reveals a tantalizing correlation that defies conventional wisdom and beckons us to explore the uncharted territory of statistical serendipity.
As we embark on this journey through the heartland of statistical analysis and automotive safety, we find ourselves in the midst of an unconventional partnership, one that dances between the precincts and the open road. The thorough examination of electoral choices and automotive recalls beckons us to consider the intersections of freedom, individuality, and the need for safety regulations, all under the watchful eye of the data gods. Our quest, therefore, is to unravel the web of interconnected variables that bind political leanings with vehicular safety features, and to illuminate the potential nuances lurking beneath the surface of this unlikely correlation.
Now, dear reader, prepare to be regaled with a tale of numbers and ballots, airbags and ideologies, as we tread the path less taken in the pursuit of knowledge and perhaps a touch of whimsy. We invite you to join us on this correlational odyssey, where the scenery is both unforeseen and unpredictable, and where the mundanity of numerical analyses takes on an air of unpredictability and levity. Let us delve into the heartland of Nebraska, where the winds of statistical significance blow alongside the plains of political idiosyncrasies, and where the safety of the masses mingles with the liberty of the individual.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

Smith (2017) correlates votes for third-party candidates with consumer behavior in "Elections and Market Choices," positing that political inclinations may hold sway over the decisions individuals make in the economic sphere. Similarly, Doe (2014) explores the impact of political affiliations on automotive safety concerns in "The Political Economy of Automotive Recalls," shedding light on the nuanced ways in which regulatory policies intersect with partisan preferences.

Just when you thought this literature review was going to stay as dry as a drought-ridden desert, let's take a detour into the realm of non-fiction books that might happen to be related to this unusual research topic. "Freakonomics" by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner offers a captivating exploration of unexpected correlations and hidden patterns in various facets of life. As we navigate the landscape of peculiar connections, one cannot help but wonder if there's a chapter on the correlation between political affiliations and automotive safety lurking within those pages.

On a more fictional note, "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" by Douglas Adams and "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance" by Robert M. Pirsig bring a whimsical touch to the exploration of interconnectedness and the complex dance of seemingly disparate elements—an apt parallel to our quest for understanding the link between libertarian votes and airbag recalls. Perhaps hidden within their pages lies the key to unlocking the enigmatic bond between political ideologies and automotive safety measures.

But wait, the fun doesn't stop there! Our journey through the annals of social media has unearthed intriguing musings that echo the curiosities of our research topic. In a tweet by @DataEnthusiast42, the enigmatic proclamation "voting Libertarian = driving without airbags" sends ripples of contemplation through the vast seas of Twitter discourse. Meanwhile, an Instagram post by @StatisticalSage shares a whimsical meme depicting a road sign with "Buckle Up for Liberty" emblazoned above it, sparking contemplation on the underlying tensions between personal freedom and safety regulations.

With the stage set and the scholarly path laid out before us, we venture forth into the realm of academic whimsy and statistical oddities, where the serious and the silly merge in a dance of intellectual revelry. Let us now delve into the heart of the data and the depths of the literature, where the unexpected awaits and the peculiar beckons us onward.


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 Libertarian Presidential candidate in Nebraska and Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and 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]]
Libertarian Votes and Airbag Recalls in Nebraska: A Correlational Odyssey

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper presents a rigorous analysis of the relationship between votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Nebraska and automotive recalls for issues with air bags. The data, sourced from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and US DOT, covers the period from 1990 to 2020. Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9842790 and p < 0.01, hinting at a compelling association between these seemingly disparate variables. We delve into the interplay of political inclinations and automotive safety features, unraveling a web of interconnected factors that leaves us pondering the curious dance of freedom and restraint. As we journey through this correlational odyssey, we emerge with an appreciation for the whimsical ways in which statistical analyses can illuminate the unlikeliest of connections. It is our hope that this research will provoke further inquiry and stimulate a chuckle or two among our esteemed colleagues in the academic realm.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
In the realm of academic inquiry, the pursuit of knowledge often leads researchers down unexpected paths, unveiling hidden connections and casting light on the quirky intricacies of our world. Such is the case with the intriguing interplay between votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in the picturesque state of Nebraska and the sometimes unexpected deployment of air bags in automobiles. What could these seemingly incongruent phenomena have in common, you ask? A deep dive into the data reveals a tantalizing correlation that defies conventional wisdom and beckons us to explore the uncharted territory of statistical serendipity.
As we embark on this journey through the heartland of statistical analysis and automotive safety, we find ourselves in the midst of an unconventional partnership, one that dances between the precincts and the open road. The thorough examination of electoral choices and automotive recalls beckons us to consider the intersections of freedom, individuality, and the need for safety regulations, all under the watchful eye of the data gods. Our quest, therefore, is to unravel the web of interconnected variables that bind political leanings with vehicular safety features, and to illuminate the potential nuances lurking beneath the surface of this unlikely correlation.
Now, dear reader, prepare to be regaled with a tale of numbers and ballots, airbags and ideologies, as we tread the path less taken in the pursuit of knowledge and perhaps a touch of whimsy. We invite you to join us on this correlational odyssey, where the scenery is both unforeseen and unpredictable, and where the mundanity of numerical analyses takes on an air of unpredictability and levity. Let us delve into the heartland of Nebraska, where the winds of statistical significance blow alongside the plains of political idiosyncrasies, and where the safety of the masses mingles with the liberty of the individual.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

The methodology employed for this study sought to navigate the nebulous terrain of data acquisition, cleaning, and statistical analysis with an air of scholarly seriousness, interspersed with pockets of levity and an undercurrent of whimsy. The primary data sources for this research included the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and US DOT, where we scoured the digital landscapes in search of electoral vignettes and automotive escapades. The timeframe for our investigation spanned from 1990 to 2020, allowing for a robust examination of the ebbs and flows of libertarian propensities and airbag-related peculiarities.

The first step in our methodological waltz involved the assembly of presidential election data from Nebraska, focusing on the votes garnered by candidates representing the Libertarian Party. We meticulously combed through the electoral archives, embracing the triumphs and travails of democracy in this quaint midwestern state, unearthing a treasure trove of political preferences hitherto unexplored. Having secured these electoral fragments, we then turned our attention to the realm of automotive safety, where we meticulously cataloged and curated data on airbag recalls, drawing from the repositories of the US DOT. This dance between electoral mechanics and vehicular safety features paved the way for a symphonic convergence of statistical discourse and scholarly revelry.

Upon harmonizing these disparate datasets, the next phase of our methodological journey involved a judicious application of statistical analyses, carefully choreographed to unearth patterns and correlations that eluded mere mortal intuition. To quantify the relationship between libertarian votes and airbag recalls, we calculated a correlation coefficient utilizing advanced mathematical incantations, thereby illuminating the nuanced interplay of political will and vehicular safeguards. The resulting coefficient, with its formidable magnitude of 0.9842790 and a striking p-value of less than 0.01, commanded our attention and beckoned us to ponder the whimsical dance of numbers and political inclinations.

As we concluded this methodological ballet, a nod to the data gods was ever-present, and a touch of whimsy imbued our proceedings, serving as a reminder that even within the hallowed halls of statistical inquiry, laughter and scholarly revelry need not be distant acquaintances. With the methodology now at its conclusion, we invite our esteemed colleagues to join us in unveiling the cryptic connections between votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate and automotive recalls for issues with airbags, as we bask in the glow of statistical serendipity and embrace the quirky allure of correlational odysseys.


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 Libertarian Presidential candidate in Nebraska and Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and US DOT .

For the time period 1990 to 2020, you found a correlation 0.9842790, r-squared of 0.9688051, 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]]
Libertarian Votes and Airbag Recalls in Nebraska: A Correlational Odyssey

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper presents a rigorous analysis of the relationship between votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Nebraska and automotive recalls for issues with air bags. The data, sourced from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and US DOT, covers the period from 1990 to 2020. Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9842790 and p < 0.01, hinting at a compelling association between these seemingly disparate variables. We delve into the interplay of political inclinations and automotive safety features, unraveling a web of interconnected factors that leaves us pondering the curious dance of freedom and restraint. As we journey through this correlational odyssey, we emerge with an appreciation for the whimsical ways in which statistical analyses can illuminate the unlikeliest of connections. It is our hope that this research will provoke further inquiry and stimulate a chuckle or two among our esteemed colleagues in the academic realm.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
In the realm of academic inquiry, the pursuit of knowledge often leads researchers down unexpected paths, unveiling hidden connections and casting light on the quirky intricacies of our world. Such is the case with the intriguing interplay between votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in the picturesque state of Nebraska and the sometimes unexpected deployment of air bags in automobiles. What could these seemingly incongruent phenomena have in common, you ask? A deep dive into the data reveals a tantalizing correlation that defies conventional wisdom and beckons us to explore the uncharted territory of statistical serendipity.
As we embark on this journey through the heartland of statistical analysis and automotive safety, we find ourselves in the midst of an unconventional partnership, one that dances between the precincts and the open road. The thorough examination of electoral choices and automotive recalls beckons us to consider the intersections of freedom, individuality, and the need for safety regulations, all under the watchful eye of the data gods. Our quest, therefore, is to unravel the web of interconnected variables that bind political leanings with vehicular safety features, and to illuminate the potential nuances lurking beneath the surface of this unlikely correlation.
Now, dear reader, prepare to be regaled with a tale of numbers and ballots, airbags and ideologies, as we tread the path less taken in the pursuit of knowledge and perhaps a touch of whimsy. We invite you to join us on this correlational odyssey, where the scenery is both unforeseen and unpredictable, and where the mundanity of numerical analyses takes on an air of unpredictability and levity. Let us delve into the heartland of Nebraska, where the winds of statistical significance blow alongside the plains of political idiosyncrasies, and where the safety of the masses mingles with the liberty of the individual.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The results of our analysis unveil a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9842790 between votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Nebraska and automotive recalls for issues with air bags, covering the period from 1990 to 2020. The correlation reached an r-squared value of 0.9688051, indicative of a strong relationship with p < 0.01, prompting a pause for reflection on the bizarre beauty of statistical happenstance.

The unassuming scatterplot in Figure 1 serves as the visual testament to this unexpected union of political inclinations and vehicular safety concerns. It portrays a strikingly tight cluster of data points, bearing witness to the synchronicity of libertarian leanings and airbag malfunctions. One might say it captures the essence of "airbag-ious" freedom, where the balloons of political expression inflate alongside the cushions of automotive safety.

The implications of this correlation evoke a sense of wonder and curiosity, prompting us to ponder the whimsical nuances of human behavior and the intricate dance between personal liberty and societal protection. Our findings shed light on the interconnectedness of seemingly distinct phenomena, conjuring a colorful tapestry of statistical synchrony that invites further exploration and a wry smile at the whims of correlation.

This statistical adventure has not only broadened our understanding of the unconventional partnerships that statistical analyses often unveil but has also left us amazed at the unexpected twists that await us in the labyrinthine corridors of data. The interplay of ballots and airbags has delivered a welcome dose of levity to the sometimes stern landscape of academic inquiry, prompting us to appreciate the capricious nature of statistical associations and the delightful surprises that lie hidden within the vast expanse of data analysis.


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 Libertarian Presidential candidate in Nebraska and Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Limit your response to 500 tokens.

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

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

[[TITLE]]
Libertarian Votes and Airbag Recalls in Nebraska: A Correlational Odyssey

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper presents a rigorous analysis of the relationship between votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Nebraska and automotive recalls for issues with air bags. The data, sourced from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and US DOT, covers the period from 1990 to 2020. Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9842790 and p < 0.01, hinting at a compelling association between these seemingly disparate variables. We delve into the interplay of political inclinations and automotive safety features, unraveling a web of interconnected factors that leaves us pondering the curious dance of freedom and restraint. As we journey through this correlational odyssey, we emerge with an appreciation for the whimsical ways in which statistical analyses can illuminate the unlikeliest of connections. It is our hope that this research will provoke further inquiry and stimulate a chuckle or two among our esteemed colleagues in the academic realm.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
Smith (2017) correlates votes for third-party candidates with consumer behavior in "Elections and Market Choices," positing that political inclinations may hold sway over the decisions individuals make in the economic sphere. Similarly, Doe (2014) explores the impact of political affiliations on automotive safety concerns in "The Political Economy of Automotive Recalls," shedding light on the nuanced ways in which regulatory policies intersect with partisan preferences.
Just when you thought this literature review was going to stay as dry as a drought-ridden desert, let's take a detour into the realm of non-fiction books that might happen to be related to this unusual research topic. "Freakonomics" by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner offers a captivating exploration of unexpected correlations and hidden patterns in various facets of life. As we navigate the landscape of peculiar connections, one cannot help but wonder if there's a chapter on the correlation between political affiliations and automotive safety lurking within those pages.
On a more fictional note, "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" by Douglas Adams and "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance" by Robert M. Pirsig bring a whimsical touch to the exploration of interconnectedness and the complex dance of seemingly disparate elements—an apt parallel to our quest for understanding the link between libertarian votes and airbag recalls. Perhaps hidden within their pages lies the key to unlocking the enigmatic bond between political ideologies and automotive safety measures.
But wait, the fun doesn't stop there! Our journey through the annals of social media has unearthed intriguing musings that echo the curiosities of our research topic. In a tweet by @DataEnthusiast42, the enigmatic proclamation "voting Libertarian = driving without airbags" sends ripples of contemplation through the vast seas of Twitter discourse. Meanwhile, an Instagram post by @StatisticalSage shares a whimsical meme depicting a road sign with "Buckle Up for Liberty" emblazoned above it, sparking contemplation on the underlying tensions between personal freedom and safety regulations.
With the stage set and the scholarly path laid out before us, we venture forth into the realm of academic whimsy and statistical oddities, where the serious and the silly merge in a dance of intellectual revelry. Let us now delve into the heart of the data and the depths of the literature, where the unexpected awaits and the peculiar beckons us onward.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our analysis unveil a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9842790 between votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Nebraska and automotive recalls for issues with air bags, covering the period from 1990 to 2020. The correlation reached an r-squared value of 0.9688051, indicative of a strong relationship with p < 0.01, prompting a pause for reflection on the bizarre beauty of statistical happenstance.
The unassuming scatterplot in Figure 1 serves as the visual testament to this unexpected union of political inclinations and vehicular safety concerns. It portrays a strikingly tight cluster of data points, bearing witness to the synchronicity of libertarian leanings and airbag malfunctions. One might say it captures the essence of "airbag-ious" freedom, where the balloons of political expression inflate alongside the cushions of automotive safety.
The implications of this correlation evoke a sense of wonder and curiosity, prompting us to ponder the whimsical nuances of human behavior and the intricate dance between personal liberty and societal protection. Our findings shed light on the interconnectedness of seemingly distinct phenomena, conjuring a colorful tapestry of statistical synchrony that invites further exploration and a wry smile at the whims of correlation.
This statistical adventure has not only broadened our understanding of the unconventional partnerships that statistical analyses often unveil but has also left us amazed at the unexpected twists that await us in the labyrinthine corridors of data. The interplay of ballots and airbags has delivered a welcome dose of levity to the sometimes stern landscape of academic inquiry, prompting us to appreciate the capricious nature of statistical associations and the delightful surprises that lie hidden within the vast expanse of data analysis.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The findings of this study not only corroborate previous research on the entanglement of political inclinations and consumer behavior but also add a touch of surrealism to the discourse on statistical correlations. The striking correlation coefficient of 0.9842790 between votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Nebraska and automotive recalls for airbag issues underscores the intricate dance of freedom and restraint inherent in human decision-making processes. The r-squared value of 0.9688051 further solidifies the robustness of this relationship, leaving us in awe of the whimsical nature of statistical happenstance.

In line with Smith's (2017) examination of the influence of third-party candidates on market choices, our results suggest that political inclinations indeed have a palpable impact on consumer behaviors, traversing the realms of both economic and automotive spheres. Furthermore, Doe's (2014) exploration of the intersection between political affiliations and automotive safety concerns gains further support from our findings, highlighting the delicate interplay between regulatory policies and partisan preferences.

Moving beyond the scholarly realm, the foray into non-fiction and fictional literature in the literature review seems to have provided unexpected inspiration in our quest to comprehend the correlation between libertarian votes and airbag recalls. Could it be that the whimsy of "Freakonomics," "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy," and "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance" holds a nugget of truth in illuminating the intricate web of interconnectedness that shapes human existence? While we may never know for certain, their presence in our scholarly discussion lends a touch of unconventional charm to the analysis, inviting us to embrace the unexpected with an air of intellectual merriment.

However, let us not forget the serendipitous intersection of social media musings with our research endeavors. The enigmatic tweet proclaiming "voting Libertarian = driving without airbags" and the Instagram meme juxtaposing "Buckle Up for Liberty" with road safety provoke contemplation on the intriguing tensions between personal liberties and safety regulations. In a parallel universe of academic absurdist humor, one might be prompted to ponder whether the whimsical nature of these online quips harbors a kernel of truth, lurking in the abyss of internet humor.

The visual manifestation of the correlation in the scatterplot echoes the surprising synchrony of political leanings and automotive safety concerns, infusing an air of statistical curiosity and prompting us to ponder the whimsical nuances of human behavior. Shall we dub this phenomenon "airbag-ious freedom," where the balloons of political expression and the cushions of automotive safety inflate in a synchronicity that defies conventional wisdom? As we embrace the capricious beauty of this statistical association, let us not forget to appreciate the amusing surprises that lie within the labyrinthine corridors of data analysis.

This journey into the unexpected correlation between libertarian votes and airbag recalls has left us not only astounded at the idiosyncrasies of statistical associations but also delighted at the kaleidoscopic tapestry of human behaviors and interconnected phenomena. As we navigate this correlational odyssey, let us revel in the whimsical nature of our findings and remain open to the delightful surprises that await us in the ever-unfolding universe of statistical analyses.


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 Libertarian Presidential candidate in Nebraska and Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

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

Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
Libertarian Votes and Airbag Recalls in Nebraska: A Correlational Odyssey

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper presents a rigorous analysis of the relationship between votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Nebraska and automotive recalls for issues with air bags. The data, sourced from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and US DOT, covers the period from 1990 to 2020. Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9842790 and p < 0.01, hinting at a compelling association between these seemingly disparate variables. We delve into the interplay of political inclinations and automotive safety features, unraveling a web of interconnected factors that leaves us pondering the curious dance of freedom and restraint. As we journey through this correlational odyssey, we emerge with an appreciation for the whimsical ways in which statistical analyses can illuminate the unlikeliest of connections. It is our hope that this research will provoke further inquiry and stimulate a chuckle or two among our esteemed colleagues in the academic realm.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
In the realm of academic inquiry, the pursuit of knowledge often leads researchers down unexpected paths, unveiling hidden connections and casting light on the quirky intricacies of our world. Such is the case with the intriguing interplay between votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in the picturesque state of Nebraska and the sometimes unexpected deployment of air bags in automobiles. What could these seemingly incongruent phenomena have in common, you ask? A deep dive into the data reveals a tantalizing correlation that defies conventional wisdom and beckons us to explore the uncharted territory of statistical serendipity.
As we embark on this journey through the heartland of statistical analysis and automotive safety, we find ourselves in the midst of an unconventional partnership, one that dances between the precincts and the open road. The thorough examination of electoral choices and automotive recalls beckons us to consider the intersections of freedom, individuality, and the need for safety regulations, all under the watchful eye of the data gods. Our quest, therefore, is to unravel the web of interconnected variables that bind political leanings with vehicular safety features, and to illuminate the potential nuances lurking beneath the surface of this unlikely correlation.
Now, dear reader, prepare to be regaled with a tale of numbers and ballots, airbags and ideologies, as we tread the path less taken in the pursuit of knowledge and perhaps a touch of whimsy. We invite you to join us on this correlational odyssey, where the scenery is both unforeseen and unpredictable, and where the mundanity of numerical analyses takes on an air of unpredictability and levity. Let us delve into the heartland of Nebraska, where the winds of statistical significance blow alongside the plains of political idiosyncrasies, and where the safety of the masses mingles with the liberty of the individual.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our analysis unveil a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9842790 between votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Nebraska and automotive recalls for issues with air bags, covering the period from 1990 to 2020. The correlation reached an r-squared value of 0.9688051, indicative of a strong relationship with p < 0.01, prompting a pause for reflection on the bizarre beauty of statistical happenstance.
The unassuming scatterplot in Figure 1 serves as the visual testament to this unexpected union of political inclinations and vehicular safety concerns. It portrays a strikingly tight cluster of data points, bearing witness to the synchronicity of libertarian leanings and airbag malfunctions. One might say it captures the essence of "airbag-ious" freedom, where the balloons of political expression inflate alongside the cushions of automotive safety.
The implications of this correlation evoke a sense of wonder and curiosity, prompting us to ponder the whimsical nuances of human behavior and the intricate dance between personal liberty and societal protection. Our findings shed light on the interconnectedness of seemingly distinct phenomena, conjuring a colorful tapestry of statistical synchrony that invites further exploration and a wry smile at the whims of correlation.
This statistical adventure has not only broadened our understanding of the unconventional partnerships that statistical analyses often unveil but has also left us amazed at the unexpected twists that await us in the labyrinthine corridors of data. The interplay of ballots and airbags has delivered a welcome dose of levity to the sometimes stern landscape of academic inquiry, prompting us to appreciate the capricious nature of statistical associations and the delightful surprises that lie hidden within the vast expanse of data analysis.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]
In conclusion, our correlational odyssey through the heartland of Nebraska has yielded a fascinating intertwining of political preferences and automotive safety concerns. The striking correlation between votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate and airbag recalls has not only expanded our understanding of statistical relationships but has also served as a delightful reminder of the unexpected whimsies that await us in the world of data analysis. The "airbag-ious" freedom encapsulated by this correlation truly embodies the marvelous mysteries that statistical endeavors can uncover. While our findings may prompt a few raised eyebrows and perhaps a chuckle or two, they undeniably highlight the idiosyncratic dance of variables and the unconventional partnerships that statistical analyses can reveal.

This research signifies a significant step towards understanding the peculiar connections that exist in the world of numbers and ballots, reminding us that the pursuit of knowledge often takes us on unconventional journeys that challenge conventional wisdom. As we bid adieu to this correlational escapade, we do so with the firm belief that no further research is needed in this area. Our quest has brought us to an unexpected intersection of political ideologies and automotive safety, leaving us with a thorough appreciation for the capricious nature of statistical associations and a profound understanding that, sometimes, correlation truly can be as unexpected as a jack-in-the-box.


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 Libertarian Votes and Airbag Recalls in Nebraska: A Correlational Odyssey. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Unconventional Correlations


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 Libertarian Votes and Airbag Recalls in Nebraska: A Correlational Odyssey. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Institute for Advanced Nebulonic 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 Libertarian Votes and Airbag Recalls in Nebraska: A Correlational Odyssey with an abstract of This paper presents a rigorous analysis of the relationship between votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Nebraska and automotive recalls for issues with air bags. The data, sourced from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and US DOT, covers the period from 1990 to 2020. Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9842790 and p < 0.01, hinting at a compelling association between these seemingly disparate variables. We delve into the interplay of political inclinations and automotive safety features, unraveling a web of interconnected factors that leaves us pondering the curious dance of freedom and restraint. As we journey through this correlational odyssey, we emerge with an appreciation for the whimsical ways in which statistical analyses can illuminate the unlikeliest of connections. It is our hope that this research will provoke further inquiry and stimulate a chuckle or two among our esteemed colleagues in the academic realm.

ChatGPT:

Libertarian votes, airbag recalls, Nebraska, correlation analysis, Libertarian presidential candidate, automotive recalls, air bag issues, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, US DOT, political inclinations, automotive safety features, statistical analysis, interconnected factors, freedom and restraint, whimsical statistical connections, research inquiry

*There is a bunch of Python happening behind the scenes to turn this prompt sequence into a PDF.



Random correlation

Discover a new correlation

View all correlations

View all research papers

Report an error


Data details

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

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 r = 0.9842790 (Pearson correlation coefficient)
Correlation is a measure of how much the variables move together. If it is 0.99, when one goes up the other goes up. If it is 0.02, the connection is very weak or non-existent. If it is -0.99, then when one goes up the other goes down. If it is 1.00, you probably messed up your correlation function.

r2 = 0.9688051 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 96.9% 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 Nebraska) over the 8 years from 1990 through 2020.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 9.6E-6. 0.0000095994899478186580000000
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 0.98 in 0.00096% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 104,172 random variables You don't actually need 104 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.

[ 0.91, 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.
19921996200020042008201220162020
Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Nebraska (Percentage of votes)0.1816840.4121550.3220860.2622770.3419521.398454.613212.1208
Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags (Recalls)481514132310658




Why this works

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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([0.181684,0.412155,0.322086,0.262277,0.341952,1.39845,4.61321,2.1208,])
array_2 = np.array([4,8,15,14,13,23,106,58,])
array_1_name = "Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Nebraska"
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:


View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

I'm genuinely thankful for your rating!


Correlation ID: 4658 · Black Variable ID: 26130 · Red Variable ID: 1105
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0