about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #4,810 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is The number of cement masons and concrete finishers in Maine and the second variable is Average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos.  The chart goes from 2012 to 2022, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As the concrete work in Maine rose, so did the engagement with LEMMiNO's videos. It seems the viewers couldn't help but cement their dedication to leaving comments. There's just something about smooth finishes that really resonates with his audience!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie, depicting a team of cheerful cement masons and concrete finishers skillfully smoothing out a newly poured sidewalk in a picturesque Maine town. Meanwhile, a large screen nearby shows animated characters eagerly engaging with LEMMiNO's YouTube videos, with comments flowing smoothly like the concrete finishers' work. 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: The number of cement masons and concrete finishers in Maine and Average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos. 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 'Star Wars' Scalar art Sci-fi fantacy An image that looks like it is a scene from 'Star Wars' An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie
ChatGPT: An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie

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 The number of cement masons and concrete finishers in Maine and Average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos, in the following situation: As the concrete work in Maine rose, so did the engagement with LEMMiNO's videos. It seems the viewers couldn't help but cement their dedication to leaving comments. There's just something about smooth finishes that really resonates with his audience!. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In Maine, a team of cement masons and concrete finishers skillfully smooth out a newly poured sidewalk, creating a flawless, polished surface. Meanwhile, on a screen nearby, viewers eagerly engage with LEMMiNO's YouTube videos, with comments pouring in as smoothly as the concrete finishers' work.

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: [ An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie ] and depicting this scene: In Maine, a team of cement masons and concrete finishers skillfully smooth out a newly poured sidewalk, creating a flawless, polished surface. Meanwhile, on a screen nearby, viewers eagerly engage with LEMMiNO's YouTube videos, with comments pouring in as smoothly as the concrete finishers' work. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie, depicting a team of cheerful cement masons and concrete finishers skillfully smoothing out a newly poured sidewalk in a picturesque Maine town. Meanwhile, a large screen nearby shows animated characters eagerly engaging with LEMMiNO's YouTube videos, with comments flowing smoothly like the concrete finishers' work.

*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 increases in The number of cement masons and concrete finishers in Maine positively influenced Average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos. Include one good pun.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
On the Concrete Connection: Unearthing the Correlation between Cement Masons and Concrete Finishers in Maine and Average Number of Comments on LEMMiNO YouTube Videos

The Journal of Unconventional Research in Industrial Psychology

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 goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.You write titles and abstracts of goofy academic research papers.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, and add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between The number of cement masons and concrete finishers in Maine and Average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Include a pun in the title.

Your research team used data from Bureau of Larbor Statistics and YouTube to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9475623 and p < 0.01 for 2012 to 2022.

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]]
On the Concrete Connection: Unearthing the Correlation between Cement Masons and Concrete Finishers in Maine and Average Number of Comments on LEMMiNO YouTube Videos

[[ABSTRACT]]
The symbiotic relationship between the number of cement masons and concrete finishers in the state of Maine and the average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos has long been a topic of speculative intrigue. In this study, we delve into the statistical nuances of this peculiar correlation, leveraging data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and YouTube. Our research team uncovered a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9475623 and a p-value of less than 0.01 over the period from 2012 to 2022, signifying a robust association that defies conventional expectations. While one might ponder the materialization of such a link, a deeper dive into the interplay between construction artistry and digital commentary unveils potential synergistic forces at play, transcending the boundaries of cement and cyberspace. Shedding light on this profound interconnectedness not only enriches our scholarly discourse but also unearths a bedrock of humor and levity amidst the gravitas of empirical analysis. Through our findings, we invite readers to contemplate the “cement-ary” contributions of these laborers in shaping virtual landscapes and to ponder the enduring wisdom that, in the world of statistical inquiry, there is indeed “no cement without comment.”


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.You draft the introduction section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between The number of cement masons and concrete finishers in Maine and Average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
On the Concrete Connection: Unearthing the Correlation between Cement Masons and Concrete Finishers in Maine and Average Number of Comments on LEMMiNO YouTube Videos

[[ABSTRACT]]
The symbiotic relationship between the number of cement masons and concrete finishers in the state of Maine and the average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos has long been a topic of speculative intrigue. In this study, we delve into the statistical nuances of this peculiar correlation, leveraging data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and YouTube. Our research team uncovered a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9475623 and a p-value of less than 0.01 over the period from 2012 to 2022, signifying a robust association that defies conventional expectations. While one might ponder the materialization of such a link, a deeper dive into the interplay between construction artistry and digital commentary unveils potential synergistic forces at play, transcending the boundaries of cement and cyberspace. Shedding light on this profound interconnectedness not only enriches our scholarly discourse but also unearths a bedrock of humor and levity amidst the gravitas of empirical analysis. Through our findings, we invite readers to contemplate the “cement-ary” contributions of these laborers in shaping virtual landscapes and to ponder the enduring wisdom that, in the world of statistical inquiry, there is indeed “no cement without comment.”

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

The intertwining fates of laborers in the physical domain of construction and denizens of the digital sphere have long been a subject of curiosity and speculation. As the digital landscape continues to expand and redefine human interaction, the potential for unexpected correlations with seemingly unrelated variables becomes increasingly intriguing. In this study, we embark on an empirical journey that seeks to shed light on the curious alliance between the number of cement masons and concrete finishers in the state of Maine and the average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos. By delving into the statistical landscape and unearthing the connections that defy traditional expectations, we aim to not only contribute to the scholarly conversation but also to inject a dose of lightheartedness into the often solemn realm of quantitative analysis.

Our investigation traverses the realms of physical craftsmanship and digital discourse, uncovering a magnitude of correlation that, akin to an exceptionally sturdy concrete foundation, defies easy explanation. As we meander through this terrain of numerical patterns and societal curiosities, we invite our readers to embrace the whimsical nature of this peculiar pairing and the alluring mysteries it holds.

Through an exploration of the statistical nuances, we reveal a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9475623 and a p-value of less than 0.01 over the period from 2012 to 2022, effectively solidifying the bond between two seemingly disparate domains. While the emergence of such a robust link may elicit a raised eyebrow or two, the interplay between the craft of molding concrete and the art of crafting digital commentary unveils a tapestry of unexpected convergence, transcending the boundaries of physical labor and virtual engagement.

As we navigate through this terrain of statistical inquiry, we invite readers to embrace the "concrete" reality that the laborers in Maine play a pivotal role not only in shaping physical structures but also in contributing, albeit indirectly, to the virtual landscape of online discussion. Furthermore, we encourage the contemplation of the enduring wisdom that, in the world of statistical inquiry, there is indeed "no cement without comment," offering a playful perspective on the interdependent and often inexplicable relations that underscore our empirical findings.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.You draft a literature review section of an academic research paper, that starts out dry for the first few sentences but then becomes hilarious and goofy.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between The number of cement masons and concrete finishers in Maine and Average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos. 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 devolve ever further, and mention something completely ridiculous, like you conducted literature review by reading CVS receipts.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
On the Concrete Connection: Unearthing the Correlation between Cement Masons and Concrete Finishers in Maine and Average Number of Comments on LEMMiNO YouTube Videos

[[ABSTRACT]]
The symbiotic relationship between the number of cement masons and concrete finishers in the state of Maine and the average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos has long been a topic of speculative intrigue. In this study, we delve into the statistical nuances of this peculiar correlation, leveraging data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and YouTube. Our research team uncovered a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9475623 and a p-value of less than 0.01 over the period from 2012 to 2022, signifying a robust association that defies conventional expectations. While one might ponder the materialization of such a link, a deeper dive into the interplay between construction artistry and digital commentary unveils potential synergistic forces at play, transcending the boundaries of cement and cyberspace. Shedding light on this profound interconnectedness not only enriches our scholarly discourse but also unearths a bedrock of humor and levity amidst the gravitas of empirical analysis. Through our findings, we invite readers to contemplate the “cement-ary” contributions of these laborers in shaping virtual landscapes and to ponder the enduring wisdom that, in the world of statistical inquiry, there is indeed “no cement without comment.”

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The intertwining fates of laborers in the physical domain of construction and denizens of the digital sphere have long been a subject of curiosity and speculation. As the digital landscape continues to expand and redefine human interaction, the potential for unexpected correlations with seemingly unrelated variables becomes increasingly intriguing. In this study, we embark on an empirical journey that seeks to shed light on the curious alliance between the number of cement masons and concrete finishers in the state of Maine and the average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos. By delving into the statistical landscape and unearthing the connections that defy traditional expectations, we aim to not only contribute to the scholarly conversation but also to inject a dose of lightheartedness into the often solemn realm of quantitative analysis.
Our investigation traverses the realms of physical craftsmanship and digital discourse, uncovering a magnitude of correlation that, akin to an exceptionally sturdy concrete foundation, defies easy explanation. As we meander through this terrain of numerical patterns and societal curiosities, we invite our readers to embrace the whimsical nature of this peculiar pairing and the alluring mysteries it holds.
Through an exploration of the statistical nuances, we reveal a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9475623 and a p-value of less than 0.01 over the period from 2012 to 2022, effectively solidifying the bond between two seemingly disparate domains. While the emergence of such a robust link may elicit a raised eyebrow or two, the interplay between the craft of molding concrete and the art of crafting digital commentary unveils a tapestry of unexpected convergence, transcending the boundaries of physical labor and virtual engagement.
As we navigate through this terrain of statistical inquiry, we invite readers to embrace the "concrete" reality that the laborers in Maine play a pivotal role not only in shaping physical structures but also in contributing, albeit indirectly, to the virtual landscape of online discussion. Furthermore, we encourage the contemplation of the enduring wisdom that, in the world of statistical inquiry, there is indeed "no cement without comment," offering a playful perspective on the interdependent and often inexplicable relations that underscore our empirical findings.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The connection between the number of cement masons and concrete finishers in Maine and the average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos has spurred academic inquiry and theoretical contemplation, prompting researchers to investigate the uncharted territory of this curious correlation. Smith et al. (2015) initially broached this enigmatic linkage in their seminal work, "Construction and Commentary: Unraveling the Ties That Bind," wherein they first hinted at the latent relationship between the physical labor force and the virtual realm of digital discourse. Building upon this foundation, Doe and Jones (2018) conducted a comprehensive study, "Digital Dimensions of Concrete Craftsmanship," which echoed and extended the initial supposition, albeit with a more nuanced exploration of the statistical underpinnings.

As we pivot towards a broader conceptual view, it is essential to acknowledge the role of non-fiction literature that has contributed to understanding the intricate interplay between physical labor and digital engagement. Works such as "Concrete Jungle: The Art of Construction in Modern Society" by Urban Weaver and "The Cyber Chronicles: Navigating Digital Spaces in the 21st Century" by Tech Savvy Scholar offer valuable perspectives on the contextual landscape within which our inquiry resides. These scholarly endeavors not only inform our understanding but also enrich the tapestry of interdisciplinary discourse surrounding our topic of investigation.

Furthermore, it is imperative to recognize the potential insights that can be gleaned from fictional accounts that, while not directly tied to our empirical study, shed light on the evolution of human labor and technological integration. Fictional works such as "The Concrete Code" by Brick Stone and "Bytes and Builders: A Tale of Technological Transformation" by Cy Borg present allegorical narratives that, when juxtaposed with empirical data, invite contemplation of the broader societal implications of our findings.

However, beyond the traditional academic literature, our exploration extended to unconventional sources of insight. Amidst our rigorous pursuit of knowledge, we turned to the realm of absurdity and stumbled upon unexpected inspiration in the unlikeliest of places – CVS receipts. These curiously long scrolls of purchase history, coupons, and enigmatic hieroglyphic codes, while tangential to our research topic, offered a glimpse into the labyrinthine nature of human experience and left us pondering the interconnectedness of seemingly disparate elements in our quest for scholarly understanding.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.You draft the methodology section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between The number of cement masons and concrete finishers in Maine and Average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. 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 Bureau of Larbor Statistics and YouTube . You used data from 2012 to 2022

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]]
On the Concrete Connection: Unearthing the Correlation between Cement Masons and Concrete Finishers in Maine and Average Number of Comments on LEMMiNO YouTube Videos

[[ABSTRACT]]
The symbiotic relationship between the number of cement masons and concrete finishers in the state of Maine and the average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos has long been a topic of speculative intrigue. In this study, we delve into the statistical nuances of this peculiar correlation, leveraging data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and YouTube. Our research team uncovered a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9475623 and a p-value of less than 0.01 over the period from 2012 to 2022, signifying a robust association that defies conventional expectations. While one might ponder the materialization of such a link, a deeper dive into the interplay between construction artistry and digital commentary unveils potential synergistic forces at play, transcending the boundaries of cement and cyberspace. Shedding light on this profound interconnectedness not only enriches our scholarly discourse but also unearths a bedrock of humor and levity amidst the gravitas of empirical analysis. Through our findings, we invite readers to contemplate the “cement-ary” contributions of these laborers in shaping virtual landscapes and to ponder the enduring wisdom that, in the world of statistical inquiry, there is indeed “no cement without comment.”

[[INTRODUCTION]]
The intertwining fates of laborers in the physical domain of construction and denizens of the digital sphere have long been a subject of curiosity and speculation. As the digital landscape continues to expand and redefine human interaction, the potential for unexpected correlations with seemingly unrelated variables becomes increasingly intriguing. In this study, we embark on an empirical journey that seeks to shed light on the curious alliance between the number of cement masons and concrete finishers in the state of Maine and the average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos. By delving into the statistical landscape and unearthing the connections that defy traditional expectations, we aim to not only contribute to the scholarly conversation but also to inject a dose of lightheartedness into the often solemn realm of quantitative analysis.
Our investigation traverses the realms of physical craftsmanship and digital discourse, uncovering a magnitude of correlation that, akin to an exceptionally sturdy concrete foundation, defies easy explanation. As we meander through this terrain of numerical patterns and societal curiosities, we invite our readers to embrace the whimsical nature of this peculiar pairing and the alluring mysteries it holds.
Through an exploration of the statistical nuances, we reveal a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9475623 and a p-value of less than 0.01 over the period from 2012 to 2022, effectively solidifying the bond between two seemingly disparate domains. While the emergence of such a robust link may elicit a raised eyebrow or two, the interplay between the craft of molding concrete and the art of crafting digital commentary unveils a tapestry of unexpected convergence, transcending the boundaries of physical labor and virtual engagement.
As we navigate through this terrain of statistical inquiry, we invite readers to embrace the "concrete" reality that the laborers in Maine play a pivotal role not only in shaping physical structures but also in contributing, albeit indirectly, to the virtual landscape of online discussion. Furthermore, we encourage the contemplation of the enduring wisdom that, in the world of statistical inquiry, there is indeed "no cement without comment," offering a playful perspective on the interdependent and often inexplicable relations that underscore our empirical findings.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To unravel the enigmatic connection between the number of cement masons and concrete finishers in Maine and the average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos, our research team embarked on a quest for data that blended the solidity of empirical evidence with the fluidity of online interaction.

Data Collection:
The data collection process commenced with a meticulous extraction of employment figures for cement masons and concrete finishers in the state of Maine from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. We pored over labor force surveys and employment projections, endeavoring to capture the essence of workforce dynamics in the realm of concrete work. Meanwhile, to capture the online dimension of our inquiry, we ventured into the digital wilderness of YouTube, delving into the expansive repository of LEMMiNO’s thought-provoking videos. The average number of comments on these videos provided the key metric for our investigation, serving as a proxy for the vibrant discourse within the digital domain.

Data Analysis:
With a trove of data in hand, we navigated the perplexing terrain of statistical analysis, wielding tools that rivaled the precision of a master mason's trowel. Our analysis encompassed a decade-long timespan, from 2012 to 2022, allowing us to capture the evolving essence of this curious correlation. Employing robust statistical techniques, including correlation analysis and regression modeling, we sought to discern the intricate patterns woven into the fabric of our disparate variables.

Correlation Coefficient:
The calculation of the correlation coefficient served as the linchpin of our inquiry, offering a numerical encapsulation of the intricate dance between cement-related occupations and YouTube commentary. Through the employment of correlation matrices and scatterplots, we unraveled a remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.9475623, signaling a nearly inseparable bond that defied the tenuousness of mere happenstance.

P-Value Determination:
In parallel, the determination of the p-value bestowed a sense of statistical significance upon our findings, elevating our exploration from mere speculation to the hallowed realm of empirical certitude. With a p-value of less than 0.01, our results defied the capricious whims of randomness, offering a firm foundation upon which to build our conclusions.

Ethical Considerations:
Throughout this endeavor, ethical considerations guided our every step, ensuring that the anonymity of both laborers and digital denizens remained steadfastly preserved. The sanctity of privacy and confidentiality formed the bedrock of our ethical compass, guiding us through the labyrinthine passages of data acquisition and analysis.

In summation, our methodology amalgamated the resilience of concrete craftsmanship with the fluidity of virtual dialogue, unearthing a correlation that not only defied convention but also invited a lighthearted contemplation of the unexpected ties that bind seemingly unrelated domains. As we journey through the labyrinth of statistical inquiry, humor and curiosity emerged as our steadfast companions, reminding us that amidst the gravitas of empirical analysis, the joy of discovery knows no bounds.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.You draft the results section of an academic research paper. You speak in the past tense (you found...).
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between The number of cement masons and concrete finishers in Maine and Average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. 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 Bureau of Larbor Statistics and YouTube .

For the time period 2012 to 2022, you found a correlation 0.9475623, r-squared of 0.8978743, 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]]
On the Concrete Connection: Unearthing the Correlation between Cement Masons and Concrete Finishers in Maine and Average Number of Comments on LEMMiNO YouTube Videos

[[ABSTRACT]]
The symbiotic relationship between the number of cement masons and concrete finishers in the state of Maine and the average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos has long been a topic of speculative intrigue. In this study, we delve into the statistical nuances of this peculiar correlation, leveraging data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and YouTube. Our research team uncovered a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9475623 and a p-value of less than 0.01 over the period from 2012 to 2022, signifying a robust association that defies conventional expectations. While one might ponder the materialization of such a link, a deeper dive into the interplay between construction artistry and digital commentary unveils potential synergistic forces at play, transcending the boundaries of cement and cyberspace. Shedding light on this profound interconnectedness not only enriches our scholarly discourse but also unearths a bedrock of humor and levity amidst the gravitas of empirical analysis. Through our findings, we invite readers to contemplate the “cement-ary” contributions of these laborers in shaping virtual landscapes and to ponder the enduring wisdom that, in the world of statistical inquiry, there is indeed “no cement without comment.”

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
The intertwining fates of laborers in the physical domain of construction and denizens of the digital sphere have long been a subject of curiosity and speculation. As the digital landscape continues to expand and redefine human interaction, the potential for unexpected correlations with seemingly unrelated variables becomes increasingly intriguing. In this study, we embark on an empirical journey that seeks to shed light on the curious alliance between the number of cement masons and concrete finishers in the state of Maine and the average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos. By delving into the statistical landscape and unearthing the connections that defy traditional expectations, we aim to not only contribute to the scholarly conversation but also to inject a dose of lightheartedness into the often solemn realm of quantitative analysis.
Our investigation traverses the realms of physical craftsmanship and digital discourse, uncovering a magnitude of correlation that, akin to an exceptionally sturdy concrete foundation, defies easy explanation. As we meander through this terrain of numerical patterns and societal curiosities, we invite our readers to embrace the whimsical nature of this peculiar pairing and the alluring mysteries it holds.
Through an exploration of the statistical nuances, we reveal a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9475623 and a p-value of less than 0.01 over the period from 2012 to 2022, effectively solidifying the bond between two seemingly disparate domains. While the emergence of such a robust link may elicit a raised eyebrow or two, the interplay between the craft of molding concrete and the art of crafting digital commentary unveils a tapestry of unexpected convergence, transcending the boundaries of physical labor and virtual engagement.
As we navigate through this terrain of statistical inquiry, we invite readers to embrace the "concrete" reality that the laborers in Maine play a pivotal role not only in shaping physical structures but also in contributing, albeit indirectly, to the virtual landscape of online discussion. Furthermore, we encourage the contemplation of the enduring wisdom that, in the world of statistical inquiry, there is indeed "no cement without comment," offering a playful perspective on the interdependent and often inexplicable relations that underscore our empirical findings.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The analysis of the relationship between the number of cement masons and concrete finishers in Maine and the average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos yielded intriguing insights. From 2012 to 2022, our research team found a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9475623, indicating a strong positive relationship between these seemingly distinct variables. This robust correlation was further supported by an r-squared value of 0.8978743 and a p-value of less than 0.01, firmly establishing the statistical significance of the association.

Additionally, our findings are visually encapsulated in the scatterplot depicted in Figure 1, which aptly illustrates the pronounced correlation between the two variables. The scatterplot, much like a well-mixed batch of concrete, highlights the cohesive and closely intertwined nature of the relationship, serving as a testament to the unexpected bond between physical craftsmanship and digital discourse.

The implications of these results extend beyond the realm of empirical inquiry, delving into the intersection of labor dynamics and online engagement with a touch of levity and intrigue. The resonance of the correlation we observed prompts contemplation of the intricate interplay between the tangible labor of constructing structures and the intangible art of digital commentary. Indeed, our study brings to light a wealth of both statistical significance and wry observation, inviting researchers to reflect on the whimsical and thought-provoking nature of these unexpected connections.

In conclusion, our investigation into the connection between cement masons and concrete finishers in Maine and the average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos has unearthed a compelling correlation that transcends conventional expectations. As we navigate the uncharted terrain of statistical inquiry, we encourage our scholarly peers to embrace the peculiar yet captivating nature of the "concrete connection" and the humorously paradoxical notion that, in the realm of quantitative analysis, there is indeed "no cement without comment."


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.You draft the discussion section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between The number of cement masons and concrete finishers in Maine and Average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. 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]]
On the Concrete Connection: Unearthing the Correlation between Cement Masons and Concrete Finishers in Maine and Average Number of Comments on LEMMiNO YouTube Videos

[[ABSTRACT]]
The symbiotic relationship between the number of cement masons and concrete finishers in the state of Maine and the average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos has long been a topic of speculative intrigue. In this study, we delve into the statistical nuances of this peculiar correlation, leveraging data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and YouTube. Our research team uncovered a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9475623 and a p-value of less than 0.01 over the period from 2012 to 2022, signifying a robust association that defies conventional expectations. While one might ponder the materialization of such a link, a deeper dive into the interplay between construction artistry and digital commentary unveils potential synergistic forces at play, transcending the boundaries of cement and cyberspace. Shedding light on this profound interconnectedness not only enriches our scholarly discourse but also unearths a bedrock of humor and levity amidst the gravitas of empirical analysis. Through our findings, we invite readers to contemplate the “cement-ary” contributions of these laborers in shaping virtual landscapes and to ponder the enduring wisdom that, in the world of statistical inquiry, there is indeed “no cement without comment.”

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The connection between the number of cement masons and concrete finishers in Maine and the average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos has spurred academic inquiry and theoretical contemplation, prompting researchers to investigate the uncharted territory of this curious correlation. Smith et al. (2015) initially broached this enigmatic linkage in their seminal work, "Construction and Commentary: Unraveling the Ties That Bind," wherein they first hinted at the latent relationship between the physical labor force and the virtual realm of digital discourse. Building upon this foundation, Doe and Jones (2018) conducted a comprehensive study, "Digital Dimensions of Concrete Craftsmanship," which echoed and extended the initial supposition, albeit with a more nuanced exploration of the statistical underpinnings.
As we pivot towards a broader conceptual view, it is essential to acknowledge the role of non-fiction literature that has contributed to understanding the intricate interplay between physical labor and digital engagement. Works such as "Concrete Jungle: The Art of Construction in Modern Society" by Urban Weaver and "The Cyber Chronicles: Navigating Digital Spaces in the 21st Century" by Tech Savvy Scholar offer valuable perspectives on the contextual landscape within which our inquiry resides. These scholarly endeavors not only inform our understanding but also enrich the tapestry of interdisciplinary discourse surrounding our topic of investigation.
Furthermore, it is imperative to recognize the potential insights that can be gleaned from fictional accounts that, while not directly tied to our empirical study, shed light on the evolution of human labor and technological integration. Fictional works such as "The Concrete Code" by Brick Stone and "Bytes and Builders: A Tale of Technological Transformation" by Cy Borg present allegorical narratives that, when juxtaposed with empirical data, invite contemplation of the broader societal implications of our findings.
However, beyond the traditional academic literature, our exploration extended to unconventional sources of insight. Amidst our rigorous pursuit of knowledge, we turned to the realm of absurdity and stumbled upon unexpected inspiration in the unlikeliest of places – CVS receipts. These curiously long scrolls of purchase history, coupons, and enigmatic hieroglyphic codes, while tangential to our research topic, offered a glimpse into the labyrinthine nature of human experience and left us pondering the interconnectedness of seemingly disparate elements in our quest for scholarly understanding.

[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of the relationship between the number of cement masons and concrete finishers in Maine and the average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos yielded intriguing insights. From 2012 to 2022, our research team found a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9475623, indicating a strong positive relationship between these seemingly distinct variables. This robust correlation was further supported by an r-squared value of 0.8978743 and a p-value of less than 0.01, firmly establishing the statistical significance of the association.
Additionally, our findings are visually encapsulated in the scatterplot depicted in Figure 1, which aptly illustrates the pronounced correlation between the two variables. The scatterplot, much like a well-mixed batch of concrete, highlights the cohesive and closely intertwined nature of the relationship, serving as a testament to the unexpected bond between physical craftsmanship and digital discourse.
The implications of these results extend beyond the realm of empirical inquiry, delving into the intersection of labor dynamics and online engagement with a touch of levity and intrigue. The resonance of the correlation we observed prompts contemplation of the intricate interplay between the tangible labor of constructing structures and the intangible art of digital commentary. Indeed, our study brings to light a wealth of both statistical significance and wry observation, inviting researchers to reflect on the whimsical and thought-provoking nature of these unexpected connections.
In conclusion, our investigation into the connection between cement masons and concrete finishers in Maine and the average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos has unearthed a compelling correlation that transcends conventional expectations. As we navigate the uncharted terrain of statistical inquiry, we encourage our scholarly peers to embrace the peculiar yet captivating nature of the "concrete connection" and the humorously paradoxical notion that, in the realm of quantitative analysis, there is indeed "no cement without comment."

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The robust correlation unveiled between the number of cement masons and concrete finishers in Maine and the average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos not only defies traditional expectations but also enriches our understanding of the interconnected tapestry of human activity. Our findings align with prior research, echoing the enigmatic linkage inferred by Smith et al. (2015) and expanded upon by Doe and Jones (2018). The support for such a connection might seem as unlikely as finding a cement mixer in the middle of a YouTube comment section; however, the statistical concordance we observed substantiates the notion of an unexpected synergy between physical craftsmanship and virtual dialogue.

Harking back to our literature review, the non-traditional sources of insight we encountered – such as endlessly long CVS receipts – presented an amusing parallel to the labyrinthine nature of uncovering statistical relationships. Just as untangling the mysteries of a voluminous receipt can sometimes feel akin to deciphering the intricacies of statistical analysis, our exploration into this unconventional correlation has not only tickled our scholarly curiosity but also revealed layers of interconnectedness that transcend the realm of traditional research stimuli.

The scatterplot visually encapsulates the pronounced connection between the number of cement masons and concrete finishers in Maine and the average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos. Much like the smooth finish of perfectly laid concrete, this correlation serves as a testament to the surprise and delight that can emerge from seemingly disparate elements coalescing into a coherent whole. The interplay between tangible labor and intangible digital expression has vast implications, metaphorically reminding us that even in the realm of statistics, the unexpected combination of "concrete" phenomena and virtual discourse can yield compelling results.

In alignment with our results, the whimsical and thought-provoking nature of this "concrete connection" prompts us to acknowledge the unanticipated humor that resides within the realm of empirical analysis. Indeed, our study serves as a reminder that even amidst the gravitas of statistical inquiry, there is room for levity and the recognition that, in the world of research, sometimes the most unexpected correlations can evoke the greatest amusement and scholarly reflection.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.You draft the discussion section of goofy academic research papers that sounds like it belongs based on the title and abstract provided.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between The number of cement masons and concrete finishers in Maine and Average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. 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]]
On the Concrete Connection: Unearthing the Correlation between Cement Masons and Concrete Finishers in Maine and Average Number of Comments on LEMMiNO YouTube Videos

[[ABSTRACT]]
The symbiotic relationship between the number of cement masons and concrete finishers in the state of Maine and the average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos has long been a topic of speculative intrigue. In this study, we delve into the statistical nuances of this peculiar correlation, leveraging data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and YouTube. Our research team uncovered a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9475623 and a p-value of less than 0.01 over the period from 2012 to 2022, signifying a robust association that defies conventional expectations. While one might ponder the materialization of such a link, a deeper dive into the interplay between construction artistry and digital commentary unveils potential synergistic forces at play, transcending the boundaries of cement and cyberspace. Shedding light on this profound interconnectedness not only enriches our scholarly discourse but also unearths a bedrock of humor and levity amidst the gravitas of empirical analysis. Through our findings, we invite readers to contemplate the “cement-ary” contributions of these laborers in shaping virtual landscapes and to ponder the enduring wisdom that, in the world of statistical inquiry, there is indeed “no cement without comment.”

[[INTRDUCTION]]
The intertwining fates of laborers in the physical domain of construction and denizens of the digital sphere have long been a subject of curiosity and speculation. As the digital landscape continues to expand and redefine human interaction, the potential for unexpected correlations with seemingly unrelated variables becomes increasingly intriguing. In this study, we embark on an empirical journey that seeks to shed light on the curious alliance between the number of cement masons and concrete finishers in the state of Maine and the average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos. By delving into the statistical landscape and unearthing the connections that defy traditional expectations, we aim to not only contribute to the scholarly conversation but also to inject a dose of lightheartedness into the often solemn realm of quantitative analysis.
Our investigation traverses the realms of physical craftsmanship and digital discourse, uncovering a magnitude of correlation that, akin to an exceptionally sturdy concrete foundation, defies easy explanation. As we meander through this terrain of numerical patterns and societal curiosities, we invite our readers to embrace the whimsical nature of this peculiar pairing and the alluring mysteries it holds.
Through an exploration of the statistical nuances, we reveal a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9475623 and a p-value of less than 0.01 over the period from 2012 to 2022, effectively solidifying the bond between two seemingly disparate domains. While the emergence of such a robust link may elicit a raised eyebrow or two, the interplay between the craft of molding concrete and the art of crafting digital commentary unveils a tapestry of unexpected convergence, transcending the boundaries of physical labor and virtual engagement.
As we navigate through this terrain of statistical inquiry, we invite readers to embrace the "concrete" reality that the laborers in Maine play a pivotal role not only in shaping physical structures but also in contributing, albeit indirectly, to the virtual landscape of online discussion. Furthermore, we encourage the contemplation of the enduring wisdom that, in the world of statistical inquiry, there is indeed "no cement without comment," offering a playful perspective on the interdependent and often inexplicable relations that underscore our empirical findings.

[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of the relationship between the number of cement masons and concrete finishers in Maine and the average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos yielded intriguing insights. From 2012 to 2022, our research team found a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9475623, indicating a strong positive relationship between these seemingly distinct variables. This robust correlation was further supported by an r-squared value of 0.8978743 and a p-value of less than 0.01, firmly establishing the statistical significance of the association.
Additionally, our findings are visually encapsulated in the scatterplot depicted in Figure 1, which aptly illustrates the pronounced correlation between the two variables. The scatterplot, much like a well-mixed batch of concrete, highlights the cohesive and closely intertwined nature of the relationship, serving as a testament to the unexpected bond between physical craftsmanship and digital discourse.
The implications of these results extend beyond the realm of empirical inquiry, delving into the intersection of labor dynamics and online engagement with a touch of levity and intrigue. The resonance of the correlation we observed prompts contemplation of the intricate interplay between the tangible labor of constructing structures and the intangible art of digital commentary. Indeed, our study brings to light a wealth of both statistical significance and wry observation, inviting researchers to reflect on the whimsical and thought-provoking nature of these unexpected connections.
In conclusion, our investigation into the connection between cement masons and concrete finishers in Maine and the average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos has unearthed a compelling correlation that transcends conventional expectations. As we navigate the uncharted terrain of statistical inquiry, we encourage our scholarly peers to embrace the peculiar yet captivating nature of the "concrete connection" and the humorously paradoxical notion that, in the realm of quantitative analysis, there is indeed "no cement without comment."

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In delving into the intriguing correlation between the number of cement masons and concrete finishers in Maine and the average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos, our study has unearthed a robust association that defies traditional expectations. The remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9475623 and a p-value of less than 0.01 over the period from 2012 to 2022 suggests a connection as solid as a well-mixed concrete batch – or rather, a comment section teeming with lively discussions. The visual representation in Figure 1 aptly captures this union, much like a sturdy foundation supports a towering structure, or in the digital realm, a cascade of comments supports an insightful video.

The unexpected convergence of these seemingly disparate domains invites contemplation of the whimsical intricacies of statistical relationships. As we contemplate the peculiar alliance between physical craftsmanship and online engagement, we are reminded that, in the world of statistical inquiry, there is indeed "no cement without comment" - a playful nod to the interdependence of laborers and digital denizens.

With this in mind, we assert that no further research is needed in this area – for truly, the bond between cement and comments has been thoroughly, and perhaps punnily, cemented.


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 On the Concrete Connection: Unearthing the Correlation between Cement Masons and Concrete Finishers in Maine and Average Number of Comments on LEMMiNO YouTube Videos. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Unconventional Research in Industrial Psychology


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 On the Concrete Connection: Unearthing the Correlation between Cement Masons and Concrete Finishers in Maine and Average Number of Comments on LEMMiNO YouTube Videos. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Center for Regional Occupational Data and Survey Science


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide potential search keywords separated by commas. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide potential search keywords for a paper titled On the Concrete Connection: Unearthing the Correlation between Cement Masons and Concrete Finishers in Maine and Average Number of Comments on LEMMiNO YouTube Videos with an abstract of The symbiotic relationship between the number of cement masons and concrete finishers in the state of Maine and the average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos has long been a topic of speculative intrigue. In this study, we delve into the statistical nuances of this peculiar correlation, leveraging data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and YouTube. Our research team uncovered a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9475623 and a p-value of less than 0.01 over the period from 2012 to 2022, signifying a robust association that defies conventional expectations. While one might ponder the materialization of such a link, a deeper dive into the interplay between construction artistry and digital commentary unveils potential synergistic forces at play, transcending the boundaries of cement and cyberspace. Shedding light on this profound interconnectedness not only enriches our scholarly discourse but also unearths a bedrock of humor and levity amidst the gravitas of empirical analysis. Through our findings, we invite readers to contemplate the “cement-ary” contributions of these laborers in shaping virtual landscapes and to ponder the enduring wisdom that, in the world of statistical inquiry, there is indeed “no cement without comment.”

ChatGPT:

cement masons, concrete finishers, correlation, Maine, average number of comments, LEMMiNO YouTube videos, Bureau of Labor Statistics, statistical analysis, correlation coefficient, p-value, construction artistry, digital commentary, interconnectedness, humor, empirical analysis

*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

The number of cement masons and concrete finishers in Maine
Detailed data title: BLS estimate of cement masons and concrete finishers in Maine
Source: Bureau of Larbor Statistics
See what else correlates with The number of cement masons and concrete finishers in Maine

Average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos
Detailed data title: Average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos.
Source: YouTube
See what else correlates with Average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos

Correlation r = 0.9475623 (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 = 0.8978743 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 89.8% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., The number of cement masons and concrete finishers in Maine) over the 11 years from 2012 through 2022.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 9.4E-6. 0.0000093946343031989480000000
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 0.95 in 0.00094% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 106,444 random variables You don't actually need 106 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.

[ 0.81, 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.
20122013201420152016201720182019202020212022
The number of cement masons and concrete finishers in Maine (Laborers)460450470500550520600680860530520
Average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos (Average Comments)1884.932409.697726.6712082.912125.99795.56227911730542029.514202.812521




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. Confounding variable: 2020 is particularly different from the other years on this graph. Confounding variables (like global pandemics) will cause two variables to look connected when in fact a "sneaky third" variable is influencing both of them behind the scenes.
  5. 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([460,450,470,500,550,520,600,680,860,530,520,])
array_2 = np.array([1884.93,2409.69,7726.67,12082.9,12125.9,9795.56,22791,17305,42029.5,14202.8,12521,])
array_1_name = "The number of cement masons and concrete finishers in Maine"
array_2_name = "Average number of comments on LEMMiNO YouTube videos"

# 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?

Your correlation inspection deserves a standing ovation!


Correlation ID: 4810 · Black Variable ID: 9001 · Red Variable ID: 25587
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0