AI explanation

^{Show image generation prompt} Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image with the style of a TIME magazine cover. Depict a serene cotton field under the Arizona sun, with rows of non-GMO cotton plants standing tall and gentle swaying in the breeze. In the background, an empty makeshift voting booth denotes a decrease in conservative votes for the Republican Presidential candidate. Showcase the intertwining of agriculture and politics as the non-GMO cotton fields seem to influence the political landscape. 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: GMO use in cotton and Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Arizona. Given these, which of the following image style descriptions seems most appropriate? Pick the one that seems to be related to one of the variables at hand. Please respond with only one of the following potential descriptions: Oragami Celtic art An image that looks like it is a scene from A Disney Movie Voxel art A TIME magazine cover image
ChatGPT: A TIME 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 GMO use in cotton and Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Arizona, in the following situation: Farmers were too busy marveling at the resurgence of non-GMO cotton and didn't have time to engage in political discussions or attend rallies. The lack of genetically modified drama in the fields led to a decrease in conservative leaning cotton plants, resulting in an overall shift in the political landscape. It seems like these cotton fields were not just producing fabric, but also political preferences!. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a cotton field, rows of non-GMO cotton plants stand tall under the Arizona sun. The absence of genetically modified drama is evident as the cotton plants sway gently in the breeze. In the background, a makeshift voting booth stands empty, showing a decrease in conservative votes for the Republican Presidential candidate. The intertwining of agriculture and politics is apparent as the non-GMO cotton fields seem to influence the political landscape.

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 TIME magazine cover image ] and depicting this scene: In a cotton field, rows of non-GMO cotton plants stand tall under the Arizona sun. The absence of genetically modified drama is evident as the cotton plants sway gently in the breeze. In the background, a makeshift voting booth stands empty, showing a decrease in conservative votes for the Republican Presidential candidate. The intertwining of agriculture and politics is apparent as the non-GMO cotton fields seem to influence the political landscape. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image with the style of a TIME magazine cover. Depict a serene cotton field under the Arizona sun, with rows of non-GMO cotton plants standing tall and gentle swaying in the breeze. In the background, an empty makeshift voting booth denotes a decrease in conservative votes for the Republican Presidential candidate. Showcase the intertwining of agriculture and politics as the non-GMO cotton fields seem to influence the political landscape.

---

*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.

AI academic paper

Genetically Modified Oh-Cotton-Pickin' Politics: Analyzing the Relationship Between GMO Cotton Usage and Republican Presidential Votes in Arizona The Journal of Agri-Political Genetics Jan 2024

Problem variable:	Which variable has a problem? GMO use in cotton Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Arizona Neither / both
Issue:	What is the issue? The data is incorrect The chart isn't displaying properly There is a typo The source link is incorrect A calculation is wrong Something else
Additional details: Optional
Confirm you are a human:

Data details

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^Note 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^Note 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.
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. ^Note 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

# 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([17,22,22,24,3,2,])
array_2 = np.array([51.0211,54.8694,53.6352,53.6545,48.6716,49.056,])
array_1_name = "GMO use in cotton"
array_2_name = "Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Arizona"

# 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

• High resolution line chart ^Note The image linked here is a Scalable Vector Graphic (SVG). It is the highest resolution that is possible to achieve. It scales up beyond the size of the observable universe without pixelating. You do not need to email me asking if I have a higher resolution image. I do not. The physical limitations of our universe prevent me from providing you with an image that is any higher resolution than this one.
  
  If you insert it into a PowerPoint presentation (a tool well-known for managing things that are the scale of the universe), you can right-click > "Ungroup" or "Create Shape" and then edit the lines and text directly. You can also change the colors this way.
  
  Alternatively you can use a tool like Inkscape.
  
• High resolution line chart, optimized for mobile
• Alternative high resolution line chart
• Scatterplot
• Portable line chart (png)
• Portable line chart (png), optimized for mobile
• Line chart for only GMO use in cotton
• Line chart for only Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Arizona
• AI-generated correlation image
• The spurious research paper: Genetically Modified Oh-Cotton-Pickin' Politics: Analyzing the Relationship Between GMO Cotton Usage and Republican Presidential Votes in Arizona