about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #5,095 · 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 Republican Senators in Georgia and the second variable is Average number of comments on Matt Parker's YouTube videos.  The chart goes from 2011 to 2021, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As the Republican votes for Senators in Georgia increased, it led to a surge in political interest. This surge inadvertently sparked a newfound fascination with numbers, statistics, and logical reasoning, leading more people to engage with Stand-up Maths videos to add some much-needed levity to their political-adjacent stress, after all, who knew that 'stand-up math' referred to the comedy of errors in the electoral process!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie, showing a bustling Georgia city street filled with animated characters engaging in lively political discussions, surrounded by an atmosphere of excitement and energy. In the background, cozy living rooms are depicted with families and friends gathered around the TV, watching Stand-up Maths YouTube videos, with a sense of light-hearted relief and clever insights. The scene should burst with colorful animation, vibrant energy, and subtle nods to the surge of Republican votes for Senators and the newfound fascination with numbers and statistics. 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: Republican votes for Senators in Georgia and Average number of comments on Stand-up Maths 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: a Polaroid photo Celtic art An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie Woodblock painting Macabre
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 Republican votes for Senators in Georgia and Average number of comments on Stand-up Maths YouTube videos, in the following situation: As the Republican votes for Senators in Georgia increased, it led to a surge in political interest. This surge inadvertently sparked a newfound fascination with numbers, statistics, and logical reasoning, leading more people to engage with Stand-up Maths videos to add some much-needed levity to their political-adjacent stress, after all, who knew that 'stand-up math' referred to the comedy of errors in the electoral process!. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a lively Georgia city, as the Republican votes for Senators surged, the streets buzzed with political discussions and excitement. Meanwhile, in cozy living rooms, the average number of comments on Stand-up Maths YouTube videos also soared, as viewers sought light-hearted relief and clever insights amidst the newfound fascination with numbers and statistics.

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 a lively Georgia city, as the Republican votes for Senators surged, the streets buzzed with political discussions and excitement. Meanwhile, in cozy living rooms, the average number of comments on Stand-up Maths YouTube videos also soared, as viewers sought light-hearted relief and clever insights amidst the newfound fascination with numbers and statistics. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie, showing a bustling Georgia city street filled with animated characters engaging in lively political discussions, surrounded by an atmosphere of excitement and energy. In the background, cozy living rooms are depicted with families and friends gathered around the TV, watching Stand-up Maths YouTube videos, with a sense of light-hearted relief and clever insights. The scene should burst with colorful animation, vibrant energy, and subtle nods to the surge of Republican votes for Senators and the newfound fascination with numbers and statistics.

*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 Republican votes for Senators in Georgia caused Average number of comments on Stand-up Maths YouTube videos to increase. Add a funny one-liner at the end.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.05)
Laughing All the Way to the Ballot Box: An Analysis of Republican Votes in Georgia and Stand-up Maths YouTube Comments

Journal of Political Humor and Mathematical Musings

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 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 Republican votes for Senators in Georgia and Average number of comments on Stand-up Maths YouTube videos. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Make the title seem clever.

Your research team used data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and YouTube to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9734496 and p < 0.05 for 2011 to 2021.

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]]
"Laughing All the Way to the Ballot Box: An Analysis of Republican Votes in Georgia and Stand-up Maths YouTube Comments"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve into the unexpected relationship between political preferences and mathematical humor. Using data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the ever-entertaining realm of YouTube, we set out to unravel the correlation between the number of votes for Republican Senators in Georgia and the average number of comments on Stand-up Maths YouTube videos. Our findings revealed a shockingly high correlation coefficient of 0.9734496 and p < 0.05 for the period spanning from 2011 to 2021. Yes, you read that right - there appears to be a striking link between political leanings and an affinity for math-related comedy. So, the next time you're crunching numbers at the ballot box, don't forget to factor in the humorous influence of YouTube comments. This research adds a whole new meaning to the phrase "number crunching" and demonstrates that when it comes to political behavior, there might just be some "math-ematical" variables at play that we never even considered!


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a 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 Republican votes for Senators in Georgia and Average number of comments on Stand-up Maths YouTube videos. Make lots of 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]]
"Laughing All the Way to the Ballot Box: An Analysis of Republican Votes in Georgia and Stand-up Maths YouTube Comments"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve into the unexpected relationship between political preferences and mathematical humor. Using data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the ever-entertaining realm of YouTube, we set out to unravel the correlation between the number of votes for Republican Senators in Georgia and the average number of comments on Stand-up Maths YouTube videos. Our findings revealed a shockingly high correlation coefficient of 0.9734496 and p < 0.05 for the period spanning from 2011 to 2021. Yes, you read that right - there appears to be a striking link between political leanings and an affinity for math-related comedy. So, the next time you're crunching numbers at the ballot box, don't forget to factor in the humorous influence of YouTube comments. This research adds a whole new meaning to the phrase "number crunching" and demonstrates that when it comes to political behavior, there might just be some "math-ematical" variables at play that we never even considered!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

Gather 'round, fellow academics and statistics enthusiasts, for we are about to embark on a journey filled with unexpected twists, jaw-dropping correlations, and mathematically inclined hilarity. Picture this: an election day in Georgia, with voters showing up to cast their ballots for Republican Senators. Meanwhile, across the digital realm of YouTube, fans of Stand-up Maths are engaging in clever banter and endless puns in the comment section. Now, imagine if these seemingly unrelated activities were actually intertwined in a cosmic dance of numbers and laughter. Hold on to your calculators, because that's precisely what our research aims to explore!

As we kick off this unconventional investigation, we're reminded of the wise words of Galileo: "Mathematics is the language with which God has written the universe." But in our case, it seems that this language extends beyond the cosmos and seeps into the polling stations. Our quest begins with the striking observation that these realms of political expression and mathematical amusement might just be united by an invisible thread of correlation.

So, let's put on our lab coats, grab our slide rules, and plunge into the heart of this peculiar relationship. Our mission is to decipher the mysterious connection between Republican votes in Georgia and the uproarious conversations buzzing around Stand-up Maths videos. Are these seemingly disparate variables actually influenced by an underlying force, akin to the unifying theory of physics? Or is this just a statistical anomaly that makes us want to exclaim, "You've got to be kidding, that's statistically significant?!"

Before we dive into the nitty-gritty of our analysis, let's take a moment to appreciate the sheer absurdity and whimsy of this undertaking. Sifting through piles of election data and YouTube comments, we find ourselves in uncharted territory, where the boundaries of political science and mathematical humor collide to form a Venn diagram of scholarly intrigue. It's like mixing apples and oranges, or in this case, comparing political pundits to pun-slinging math whizzes. But hey, in the world of research, sometimes you've got to think outside the box plot.

As we delve deeper into this novel confluence of numbers and jests, let us not forget to maintain a healthy dose of curiosity and humor. After all, what good is data analysis without a sprinkle of witticism and a pinch of tongue-in-cheek observation? So, saddle up your analytical horses, folks, because we're about to ride through the rollercoaster of statistical oddities and perhaps stumble upon a treasure trove of mathematically inclined merriment. And who knows, we might just uncover a correlation so compelling that it becomes the "formula" for future political and comedic analyses.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a 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 Republican votes for Senators in Georgia and Average number of comments on Stand-up Maths YouTube videos. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

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

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then devolve ever further, and mention something completely ridiculous, like you conducted literature review by reading the backs of shampoo bottles.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Laughing All the Way to the Ballot Box: An Analysis of Republican Votes in Georgia and Stand-up Maths YouTube Comments"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve into the unexpected relationship between political preferences and mathematical humor. Using data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the ever-entertaining realm of YouTube, we set out to unravel the correlation between the number of votes for Republican Senators in Georgia and the average number of comments on Stand-up Maths YouTube videos. Our findings revealed a shockingly high correlation coefficient of 0.9734496 and p < 0.05 for the period spanning from 2011 to 2021. Yes, you read that right - there appears to be a striking link between political leanings and an affinity for math-related comedy. So, the next time you're crunching numbers at the ballot box, don't forget to factor in the humorous influence of YouTube comments. This research adds a whole new meaning to the phrase "number crunching" and demonstrates that when it comes to political behavior, there might just be some "math-ematical" variables at play that we never even considered!

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
Gather 'round, fellow academics and statistics enthusiasts, for we are about to embark on a journey filled with unexpected twists, jaw-dropping correlations, and mathematically inclined hilarity. Picture this: an election day in Georgia, with voters showing up to cast their ballots for Republican Senators. Meanwhile, across the digital realm of YouTube, fans of Stand-up Maths are engaging in clever banter and endless puns in the comment section. Now, imagine if these seemingly unrelated activities were actually intertwined in a cosmic dance of numbers and laughter. Hold on to your calculators, because that's precisely what our research aims to explore!
As we kick off this unconventional investigation, we're reminded of the wise words of Galileo: "Mathematics is the language with which God has written the universe." But in our case, it seems that this language extends beyond the cosmos and seeps into the polling stations. Our quest begins with the striking observation that these realms of political expression and mathematical amusement might just be united by an invisible thread of correlation.
So, let's put on our lab coats, grab our slide rules, and plunge into the heart of this peculiar relationship. Our mission is to decipher the mysterious connection between Republican votes in Georgia and the uproarious conversations buzzing around Stand-up Maths videos. Are these seemingly disparate variables actually influenced by an underlying force, akin to the unifying theory of physics? Or is this just a statistical anomaly that makes us want to exclaim, "You've got to be kidding, that's statistically significant?!"
Before we dive into the nitty-gritty of our analysis, let's take a moment to appreciate the sheer absurdity and whimsy of this undertaking. Sifting through piles of election data and YouTube comments, we find ourselves in uncharted territory, where the boundaries of political science and mathematical humor collide to form a Venn diagram of scholarly intrigue. It's like mixing apples and oranges, or in this case, comparing political pundits to pun-slinging math whizzes. But hey, in the world of research, sometimes you've got to think outside the box plot.
As we delve deeper into this novel confluence of numbers and jests, let us not forget to maintain a healthy dose of curiosity and humor. After all, what good is data analysis without a sprinkle of witticism and a pinch of tongue-in-cheek observation? So, saddle up your analytical horses, folks, because we're about to ride through the rollercoaster of statistical oddities and perhaps stumble upon a treasure trove of mathematically inclined merriment. And who knows, we might just uncover a correlation so compelling that it becomes the "formula" for future political and comedic analyses.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

In "Smith et al., 2020," the authors explore the relationship between political preferences and online engagement, highlighting the diverse ways in which individuals express their affiliations in the digital sphere. Similarly, "Doe and Johnson, 2018," investigate the impact of social media activity on political behavior, shedding light on the potential influences of online content on voter sentiments. These studies lay the groundwork for understanding the interconnectedness between digital interactions and political leanings, setting the stage for our quirky exploration into the peculiar bond between Republican votes in Georgia and the comedic musings surrounding Stand-up Maths.

Moving beyond the realm of strictly academic literature, we encounter "Freakonomics" by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner, a captivating exploration of unexpected correlations and unconventional perspectives. Although not directly related to our research topic, this book serves as a reminder that in the world of data analysis, surprises and oddities often lurk beneath the surface. On a more lighthearted note, "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" by Douglas Adams appears as an anomaly in our literary references. However, amidst its whimsical narrative, one cannot help but ponder the sheer randomness and interconnectedness of the universe – a sentiment we aim to capture in our investigation.

Venturing into the realm of the absurd, we turn to an unconventional source of inspiration for our literature review: the backs of shampoo bottles. Yes, you read that correctly. As we engaged in the arduous task of concocting this scholarly pursuit, we found ourselves in need of a break from the endless stream of academic papers and thus sought solace in the bathroom. It was during these moments of respite that we stumbled upon snippets of arbitrary wisdom, which surprisingly served as a catalyst for our humorous take on the correlation between political inclinations and mathematical comedy. Who would have thought that a lathering of language on a shampoo bottle could inspire our scholarly musings?

As we fling open the doors to unorthodox sources of influence, we are reminded of the words of Albert Einstein, who once remarked, "The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and science." Embracing the whimsy and enigma of our research endeavor, we seek to unveil the enigmatic connection between Republican votes in Georgia and the uproarious comments adorning Stand-up Maths videos, armed with a touch of irreverent humor and a dash of statistical curiosity. So, with our tongues firmly in our cheeks and our datasets in hand, we embark on this offbeat academic odyssey, ready to decode the laughter-infused labyrinth of mathematical politics.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a 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 Republican votes for Senators in Georgia and Average number of comments on Stand-up Maths YouTube videos. Make lots of 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 MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and YouTube . You used data from 2011 to 2021

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]]
"Laughing All the Way to the Ballot Box: An Analysis of Republican Votes in Georgia and Stand-up Maths YouTube Comments"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve into the unexpected relationship between political preferences and mathematical humor. Using data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the ever-entertaining realm of YouTube, we set out to unravel the correlation between the number of votes for Republican Senators in Georgia and the average number of comments on Stand-up Maths YouTube videos. Our findings revealed a shockingly high correlation coefficient of 0.9734496 and p < 0.05 for the period spanning from 2011 to 2021. Yes, you read that right - there appears to be a striking link between political leanings and an affinity for math-related comedy. So, the next time you're crunching numbers at the ballot box, don't forget to factor in the humorous influence of YouTube comments. This research adds a whole new meaning to the phrase "number crunching" and demonstrates that when it comes to political behavior, there might just be some "math-ematical" variables at play that we never even considered!

[[INTRODUCTION]]
Gather 'round, fellow academics and statistics enthusiasts, for we are about to embark on a journey filled with unexpected twists, jaw-dropping correlations, and mathematically inclined hilarity. Picture this: an election day in Georgia, with voters showing up to cast their ballots for Republican Senators. Meanwhile, across the digital realm of YouTube, fans of Stand-up Maths are engaging in clever banter and endless puns in the comment section. Now, imagine if these seemingly unrelated activities were actually intertwined in a cosmic dance of numbers and laughter. Hold on to your calculators, because that's precisely what our research aims to explore!
As we kick off this unconventional investigation, we're reminded of the wise words of Galileo: "Mathematics is the language with which God has written the universe." But in our case, it seems that this language extends beyond the cosmos and seeps into the polling stations. Our quest begins with the striking observation that these realms of political expression and mathematical amusement might just be united by an invisible thread of correlation.
So, let's put on our lab coats, grab our slide rules, and plunge into the heart of this peculiar relationship. Our mission is to decipher the mysterious connection between Republican votes in Georgia and the uproarious conversations buzzing around Stand-up Maths videos. Are these seemingly disparate variables actually influenced by an underlying force, akin to the unifying theory of physics? Or is this just a statistical anomaly that makes us want to exclaim, "You've got to be kidding, that's statistically significant?!"
Before we dive into the nitty-gritty of our analysis, let's take a moment to appreciate the sheer absurdity and whimsy of this undertaking. Sifting through piles of election data and YouTube comments, we find ourselves in uncharted territory, where the boundaries of political science and mathematical humor collide to form a Venn diagram of scholarly intrigue. It's like mixing apples and oranges, or in this case, comparing political pundits to pun-slinging math whizzes. But hey, in the world of research, sometimes you've got to think outside the box plot.
As we delve deeper into this novel confluence of numbers and jests, let us not forget to maintain a healthy dose of curiosity and humor. After all, what good is data analysis without a sprinkle of witticism and a pinch of tongue-in-cheek observation? So, saddle up your analytical horses, folks, because we're about to ride through the rollercoaster of statistical oddities and perhaps stumble upon a treasure trove of mathematically inclined merriment. And who knows, we might just uncover a correlation so compelling that it becomes the "formula" for future political and comedic analyses.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To untangle the convoluted yet strangely captivating web of Republican votes in Georgia and Stand-up Maths YouTube comments, our research team devised a methodology that would make even the most stoic statisticians crack a smile. Our approach combined elements of traditional political analysis with a dash of digital whimsy, akin to blending a serious lecture on statistical methods with a sprinkle of math-themed stand-up comedy.

Data Collection:
We scoured the digital archives of the MIT Election Data and Science Lab and the Harvard Dataverse, mining every byte of information pertaining to Republican votes for Senators in Georgia from 2011 to 2021. This involved navigating through complex spreadsheets and navigating our way through countless statistical rabbit holes. On the other hand, for our source of mathematically charged entertainment, we turned to the captivating world of YouTube, specifically Stand-up Maths videos. Here, we combed through the annals of video comments, noting down every clever quip, every punny retort, and every equation-laden jest with fervent determination. Our data collection process often felt like embarking on a treasure hunt, only the treasure turned out to be a robust dataset interwoven with laughter and ballot counts.

Quantitative Analysis:
With our treasure trove of data in hand, we set off on a quantitative adventure that would make even Galileo himself raise an amused eyebrow. Utilizing sophisticated statistical software, we computed the average number of comments on Stand-up Maths videos for each month over the ten-year period. Concurrently, we diligently calculated the total votes for Republican Senators in Georgia. The process was laden with more numbers than a hyper-caffeinated mathlete's whiteboard, but we persisted with the rigor of a determined researcher and the lightheartedness of a seasoned stand-up comic.

Correlation Assessment:
The heart of our methodology lay in the examination of correlation coefficients, where the arithmetic met the art of comedic observation. Employing advanced statistical techniques, we marvelled at the patterns emerging from the relationship between Republican votes and YouTube comments, all while trying to suppress a chuckle at the sheer absurdity of the endeavor. The correlation coefficient revealed itself to be a mirror reflecting the interplay of two seemingly distinct phenomena, prompting us to ponder the profound question: does humor have a political bias? Our calculations were more enthralling than a suspenseful magic square routine, and each finding brought us closer to unraveling the enigma of this unexpected correlation.

Regression Modeling:
To deepen our understanding of the interwoven dynamics of the variables at play, we constructed regression models that danced on the edge of traditional analysis and mathematical jest. Through the creation of these models, we sought to capture the essence of the relationship between Republican votes and Stand-up Maths comments in a way that would make even the most ardent statistician nod in appreciation, punctuated with a well-timed pun or two. The conducting of regression analyses provided insights that transcended the usual boundaries of political and mathematical inquiry, inviting us to consider the possibility that laughter and political beliefs might possess a far more robust connection than previously imagined.

Ethical Considerations:
Throughout our analytical escapades, we upheld the principles of academic integrity and ethical data usage, treating every vote and every YouTube comment with the meticulous care of a master archivist and the discerning scrutiny of a seasoned analyst. At every stage of our research, we maintained the utmost respect for confidentiality and privacy, recognizing that even amidst the mirth of mathematics and the fervor of political discourse, ethical conduct must remain steadfast.

Conclusion:
With our data collection, quantitative analysis, correlation assessment, regression modeling, and ethical compass aligned, we forged ahead into the realm of statistical wonder, where each step forward brought us closer to unraveling the unexpected connection between Republican votes in Georgia and Stand-up Maths YouTube comments.

--------



Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a 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 Republican votes for Senators in Georgia and Average number of comments on Stand-up Maths YouTube videos. Make lots of 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 MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and YouTube .

For the time period 2011 to 2021, you found a correlation 0.9734496, r-squared of 0.9476041, and p < 0.05.

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]]
"Laughing All the Way to the Ballot Box: An Analysis of Republican Votes in Georgia and Stand-up Maths YouTube Comments"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve into the unexpected relationship between political preferences and mathematical humor. Using data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the ever-entertaining realm of YouTube, we set out to unravel the correlation between the number of votes for Republican Senators in Georgia and the average number of comments on Stand-up Maths YouTube videos. Our findings revealed a shockingly high correlation coefficient of 0.9734496 and p < 0.05 for the period spanning from 2011 to 2021. Yes, you read that right - there appears to be a striking link between political leanings and an affinity for math-related comedy. So, the next time you're crunching numbers at the ballot box, don't forget to factor in the humorous influence of YouTube comments. This research adds a whole new meaning to the phrase "number crunching" and demonstrates that when it comes to political behavior, there might just be some "math-ematical" variables at play that we never even considered!

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
Gather 'round, fellow academics and statistics enthusiasts, for we are about to embark on a journey filled with unexpected twists, jaw-dropping correlations, and mathematically inclined hilarity. Picture this: an election day in Georgia, with voters showing up to cast their ballots for Republican Senators. Meanwhile, across the digital realm of YouTube, fans of Stand-up Maths are engaging in clever banter and endless puns in the comment section. Now, imagine if these seemingly unrelated activities were actually intertwined in a cosmic dance of numbers and laughter. Hold on to your calculators, because that's precisely what our research aims to explore!
As we kick off this unconventional investigation, we're reminded of the wise words of Galileo: "Mathematics is the language with which God has written the universe." But in our case, it seems that this language extends beyond the cosmos and seeps into the polling stations. Our quest begins with the striking observation that these realms of political expression and mathematical amusement might just be united by an invisible thread of correlation.
So, let's put on our lab coats, grab our slide rules, and plunge into the heart of this peculiar relationship. Our mission is to decipher the mysterious connection between Republican votes in Georgia and the uproarious conversations buzzing around Stand-up Maths videos. Are these seemingly disparate variables actually influenced by an underlying force, akin to the unifying theory of physics? Or is this just a statistical anomaly that makes us want to exclaim, "You've got to be kidding, that's statistically significant?!"
Before we dive into the nitty-gritty of our analysis, let's take a moment to appreciate the sheer absurdity and whimsy of this undertaking. Sifting through piles of election data and YouTube comments, we find ourselves in uncharted territory, where the boundaries of political science and mathematical humor collide to form a Venn diagram of scholarly intrigue. It's like mixing apples and oranges, or in this case, comparing political pundits to pun-slinging math whizzes. But hey, in the world of research, sometimes you've got to think outside the box plot.
As we delve deeper into this novel confluence of numbers and jests, let us not forget to maintain a healthy dose of curiosity and humor. After all, what good is data analysis without a sprinkle of witticism and a pinch of tongue-in-cheek observation? So, saddle up your analytical horses, folks, because we're about to ride through the rollercoaster of statistical oddities and perhaps stumble upon a treasure trove of mathematically inclined merriment. And who knows, we might just uncover a correlation so compelling that it becomes the "formula" for future political and comedic analyses.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

Now, my fellow researchers and mathematical mavericks, it's time to unveil the groundbreaking results of our quest to unravel the enigmatic relationship between Republican votes in Georgia and the exhilarating world of Stand-up Maths YouTube comments. Brace yourselves for a rollercoaster ride of statistical shenanigans and unexpected correlations that will leave you pondering the whimsical interplay of politics and math-based humor.

First and foremost, let's address the elephant in the room - the correlation coefficient. Drumroll, please! Our analysis uncovered a jaw-dropping correlation coefficient of 0.9734496! Yes, you heard that right - it's almost as if the numbers themselves couldn't resist aligning in a harmonious dance of political expression and comedic banter. This correlation coefficient certainly gives a new meaning to the term "mathematically-inclined voter," doesn't it?

But wait, it gets even more mind-boggling! The coefficient of determination (r-squared) echoed the resounding harmony between these seemingly unrelated variables, boasting an impressive value of 0.9476041. It's almost as if the spirits of Gauss and Bernoulli themselves were whispering statistical secrets to us from the pages of history, urging us to uncover the hidden patterns that govern this unique relationship.

And as if that wasn't enough to make statisticians do a double take, our p-value danced beneath the illustrious threshold of 0.05, signaling that this correlation wasn't just a statistical fluke – it's as real as π in the world of mathematics. The probability of these findings occurring by pure chance is slim to none, which leads us to the question: what mysterious forces are at play here, interweaving political ideologies with the uproarious musings of math enthusiasts in the digital sphere?

But fear not, my dear colleagues! We don't expect you to take our word for it. What kind of researchers would we be if we didn't present you with an empirical demonstration of this dazzling correlation? Behold, Fig. 1 - a scatterplot that encapsulates the essence of this unexpected relationship between Republican votes in Georgia and the average number of comments on Stand-up Maths YouTube videos. Take a moment to appreciate the beauty of this scatterplot, for it encapsulates the whimsical intertwining of numbers and laughter that our statistical analysis has revealed.

In conclusion, our findings challenge the conventional wisdom surrounding political behavior and inject a dose of mathematical merriment into the equation. Who would have thought that the pitter-patter of YouTube comments and the ticking of ballots in a Georgia election could harmonize in such a statistically significant manner? This, my friends, exemplifies the delightful unpredictability of scientific inquiry and reminds us that sometimes, the most unexpected correlations can emerge from the unlikeliest of sources.

So, as we wrap up this data-driven escapade, let's tip our hats to the quirky, comedic side of statistics and acknowledge that in the world of research, the most unconventional pairings can yield the most captivating insights. After all, who knows what other statistical surprises await us in the uncharted territories of academia and YouTube comment sections?


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a 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 Republican votes for Senators in Georgia and Average number of comments on Stand-up Maths YouTube videos. Make lots of 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]]
"Laughing All the Way to the Ballot Box: An Analysis of Republican Votes in Georgia and Stand-up Maths YouTube Comments"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve into the unexpected relationship between political preferences and mathematical humor. Using data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the ever-entertaining realm of YouTube, we set out to unravel the correlation between the number of votes for Republican Senators in Georgia and the average number of comments on Stand-up Maths YouTube videos. Our findings revealed a shockingly high correlation coefficient of 0.9734496 and p < 0.05 for the period spanning from 2011 to 2021. Yes, you read that right - there appears to be a striking link between political leanings and an affinity for math-related comedy. So, the next time you're crunching numbers at the ballot box, don't forget to factor in the humorous influence of YouTube comments. This research adds a whole new meaning to the phrase "number crunching" and demonstrates that when it comes to political behavior, there might just be some "math-ematical" variables at play that we never even considered!

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
In "Smith et al., 2020," the authors explore the relationship between political preferences and online engagement, highlighting the diverse ways in which individuals express their affiliations in the digital sphere. Similarly, "Doe and Johnson, 2018," investigate the impact of social media activity on political behavior, shedding light on the potential influences of online content on voter sentiments. These studies lay the groundwork for understanding the interconnectedness between digital interactions and political leanings, setting the stage for our quirky exploration into the peculiar bond between Republican votes in Georgia and the comedic musings surrounding Stand-up Maths.
Moving beyond the realm of strictly academic literature, we encounter "Freakonomics" by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner, a captivating exploration of unexpected correlations and unconventional perspectives. Although not directly related to our research topic, this book serves as a reminder that in the world of data analysis, surprises and oddities often lurk beneath the surface. On a more lighthearted note, "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" by Douglas Adams appears as an anomaly in our literary references. However, amidst its whimsical narrative, one cannot help but ponder the sheer randomness and interconnectedness of the universe – a sentiment we aim to capture in our investigation.
Venturing into the realm of the absurd, we turn to an unconventional source of inspiration for our literature review: the backs of shampoo bottles. Yes, you read that correctly. As we engaged in the arduous task of concocting this scholarly pursuit, we found ourselves in need of a break from the endless stream of academic papers and thus sought solace in the bathroom. It was during these moments of respite that we stumbled upon snippets of arbitrary wisdom, which surprisingly served as a catalyst for our humorous take on the correlation between political inclinations and mathematical comedy. Who would have thought that a lathering of language on a shampoo bottle could inspire our scholarly musings?
As we fling open the doors to unorthodox sources of influence, we are reminded of the words of Albert Einstein, who once remarked, "The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and science." Embracing the whimsy and enigma of our research endeavor, we seek to unveil the enigmatic connection between Republican votes in Georgia and the uproarious comments adorning Stand-up Maths videos, armed with a touch of irreverent humor and a dash of statistical curiosity. So, with our tongues firmly in our cheeks and our datasets in hand, we embark on this offbeat academic odyssey, ready to decode the laughter-infused labyrinth of mathematical politics.

[[RESULTS]]
Now, my fellow researchers and mathematical mavericks, it's time to unveil the groundbreaking results of our quest to unravel the enigmatic relationship between Republican votes in Georgia and the exhilarating world of Stand-up Maths YouTube comments. Brace yourselves for a rollercoaster ride of statistical shenanigans and unexpected correlations that will leave you pondering the whimsical interplay of politics and math-based humor.
First and foremost, let's address the elephant in the room - the correlation coefficient. Drumroll, please! Our analysis uncovered a jaw-dropping correlation coefficient of 0.9734496! Yes, you heard that right - it's almost as if the numbers themselves couldn't resist aligning in a harmonious dance of political expression and comedic banter. This correlation coefficient certainly gives a new meaning to the term "mathematically-inclined voter," doesn't it?
But wait, it gets even more mind-boggling! The coefficient of determination (r-squared) echoed the resounding harmony between these seemingly unrelated variables, boasting an impressive value of 0.9476041. It's almost as if the spirits of Gauss and Bernoulli themselves were whispering statistical secrets to us from the pages of history, urging us to uncover the hidden patterns that govern this unique relationship.
And as if that wasn't enough to make statisticians do a double take, our p-value danced beneath the illustrious threshold of 0.05, signaling that this correlation wasn't just a statistical fluke – it's as real as π in the world of mathematics. The probability of these findings occurring by pure chance is slim to none, which leads us to the question: what mysterious forces are at play here, interweaving political ideologies with the uproarious musings of math enthusiasts in the digital sphere?
But fear not, my dear colleagues! We don't expect you to take our word for it. What kind of researchers would we be if we didn't present you with an empirical demonstration of this dazzling correlation? Behold, Fig. 1 - a scatterplot that encapsulates the essence of this unexpected relationship between Republican votes in Georgia and the average number of comments on Stand-up Maths YouTube videos. Take a moment to appreciate the beauty of this scatterplot, for it encapsulates the whimsical intertwining of numbers and laughter that our statistical analysis has revealed.
In conclusion, our findings challenge the conventional wisdom surrounding political behavior and inject a dose of mathematical merriment into the equation. Who would have thought that the pitter-patter of YouTube comments and the ticking of ballots in a Georgia election could harmonize in such a statistically significant manner? This, my friends, exemplifies the delightful unpredictability of scientific inquiry and reminds us that sometimes, the most unexpected correlations can emerge from the unlikeliest of sources.
So, as we wrap up this data-driven escapade, let's tip our hats to the quirky, comedic side of statistics and acknowledge that in the world of research, the most unconventional pairings can yield the most captivating insights. After all, who knows what other statistical surprises await us in the uncharted territories of academia and YouTube comment sections?

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

In this riveting discussion, we embark on a whimsical journey through the statistical rabbit hole to unravel the astonishing connection between political proclivities and the hilarity of Stand-up Maths. Our findings reflect the union of politics and punchlines, shedding light on the quirky interplay of YouTube comments and voting patterns in the state of Georgia. So, fasten your seatbelts and get ready for a statistical spectacle that will leave you chuckling and scratching your head in equal measure.

Our study's results, with their eye-popping correlation coefficient and p-value that gleams brighter than a freshly polished protractor, lend credence to the peculiar hypotheses put forth by innovative thinkers of yore. Remember those shampoo bottle nuggets of wisdom we ruminated on in our literature review? Well, as it turns out, those seemingly nonsensical mutterings may have imbued us with the irreverent spirit necessary to decode the confounding bond between political leanings and mathematical riffs. As we navigate through this bewildering landscape of data analysis, it becomes abundantly clear that whimsy and statistical significance are not mutually exclusive; they intertwine in a mesmerizing dance that leaves us spellbound and slightly giddy.

In a delightful twist of fate, our research reverberates with the witticisms of Douglas Adams' "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy." Much like the universe in Adams' whimsical masterpiece, our correlation between Republican votes in Georgia and Stand-up Maths comments stands as a testament to the interconnectedness of the seemingly disparate. If you ever doubted the pervasive influence of math-based humor on political behavior, our findings will undoubtedly leave you pondering the enigma of the universe with a raised eyebrow and a hearty chortle.

Moving on, it's only fair to pay homage to the intrepid scholars who laid the groundwork for our audacious inquiry. The meticulous examinations of online engagement by "Smith et al., 2020," and the illuminating insights of "Doe and Johnson, 2018," have prepared us to navigate the uncharted terrain of digital interactions and political allegiances. These pioneering minds opened our eyes to the boundless potential for unexpected connections in the digital ether, and our results serve as a sprightly validation of their intuitions.

As we dwell on this comical odyssey of academic inquiry, we stand shoulder to shoulder with the inquisitive spirit of Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner's "Freakonomics." While our correlation may not fit neatly within their realm of unconventional perspectives, it certainly proves that the unlikeliest of duets can produce the most captivating harmonies - a sentiment that holds true not only in the comedic cosmos of Stand-up Maths but also in the enthralling domain of statistical revelations.

In essence, our research offers a compelling depiction of the astonishing ways in which politics and mathematical humor intersect, challenging traditional paradigms and tickling the intellect in equal measure. It serves as a lighthearted yet thought-provoking clarion call to researchers everywhere, urging them to embrace the whimsical undercurrents of scientific exploration and beckoning them to embark on their own zany escapades through the captivating landscape of statistical oddities and unexpected correlations.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a 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 Republican votes for Senators in Georgia and Average number of comments on Stand-up Maths YouTube videos. Make lots of 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]]
"Laughing All the Way to the Ballot Box: An Analysis of Republican Votes in Georgia and Stand-up Maths YouTube Comments"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve into the unexpected relationship between political preferences and mathematical humor. Using data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the ever-entertaining realm of YouTube, we set out to unravel the correlation between the number of votes for Republican Senators in Georgia and the average number of comments on Stand-up Maths YouTube videos. Our findings revealed a shockingly high correlation coefficient of 0.9734496 and p < 0.05 for the period spanning from 2011 to 2021. Yes, you read that right - there appears to be a striking link between political leanings and an affinity for math-related comedy. So, the next time you're crunching numbers at the ballot box, don't forget to factor in the humorous influence of YouTube comments. This research adds a whole new meaning to the phrase "number crunching" and demonstrates that when it comes to political behavior, there might just be some "math-ematical" variables at play that we never even considered!

[[INTRDUCTION]]
Gather 'round, fellow academics and statistics enthusiasts, for we are about to embark on a journey filled with unexpected twists, jaw-dropping correlations, and mathematically inclined hilarity. Picture this: an election day in Georgia, with voters showing up to cast their ballots for Republican Senators. Meanwhile, across the digital realm of YouTube, fans of Stand-up Maths are engaging in clever banter and endless puns in the comment section. Now, imagine if these seemingly unrelated activities were actually intertwined in a cosmic dance of numbers and laughter. Hold on to your calculators, because that's precisely what our research aims to explore!
As we kick off this unconventional investigation, we're reminded of the wise words of Galileo: "Mathematics is the language with which God has written the universe." But in our case, it seems that this language extends beyond the cosmos and seeps into the polling stations. Our quest begins with the striking observation that these realms of political expression and mathematical amusement might just be united by an invisible thread of correlation.
So, let's put on our lab coats, grab our slide rules, and plunge into the heart of this peculiar relationship. Our mission is to decipher the mysterious connection between Republican votes in Georgia and the uproarious conversations buzzing around Stand-up Maths videos. Are these seemingly disparate variables actually influenced by an underlying force, akin to the unifying theory of physics? Or is this just a statistical anomaly that makes us want to exclaim, "You've got to be kidding, that's statistically significant?!"
Before we dive into the nitty-gritty of our analysis, let's take a moment to appreciate the sheer absurdity and whimsy of this undertaking. Sifting through piles of election data and YouTube comments, we find ourselves in uncharted territory, where the boundaries of political science and mathematical humor collide to form a Venn diagram of scholarly intrigue. It's like mixing apples and oranges, or in this case, comparing political pundits to pun-slinging math whizzes. But hey, in the world of research, sometimes you've got to think outside the box plot.
As we delve deeper into this novel confluence of numbers and jests, let us not forget to maintain a healthy dose of curiosity and humor. After all, what good is data analysis without a sprinkle of witticism and a pinch of tongue-in-cheek observation? So, saddle up your analytical horses, folks, because we're about to ride through the rollercoaster of statistical oddities and perhaps stumble upon a treasure trove of mathematically inclined merriment. And who knows, we might just uncover a correlation so compelling that it becomes the "formula" for future political and comedic analyses.

[[RESULTS]]
Now, my fellow researchers and mathematical mavericks, it's time to unveil the groundbreaking results of our quest to unravel the enigmatic relationship between Republican votes in Georgia and the exhilarating world of Stand-up Maths YouTube comments. Brace yourselves for a rollercoaster ride of statistical shenanigans and unexpected correlations that will leave you pondering the whimsical interplay of politics and math-based humor.
First and foremost, let's address the elephant in the room - the correlation coefficient. Drumroll, please! Our analysis uncovered a jaw-dropping correlation coefficient of 0.9734496! Yes, you heard that right - it's almost as if the numbers themselves couldn't resist aligning in a harmonious dance of political expression and comedic banter. This correlation coefficient certainly gives a new meaning to the term "mathematically-inclined voter," doesn't it?
But wait, it gets even more mind-boggling! The coefficient of determination (r-squared) echoed the resounding harmony between these seemingly unrelated variables, boasting an impressive value of 0.9476041. It's almost as if the spirits of Gauss and Bernoulli themselves were whispering statistical secrets to us from the pages of history, urging us to uncover the hidden patterns that govern this unique relationship.
And as if that wasn't enough to make statisticians do a double take, our p-value danced beneath the illustrious threshold of 0.05, signaling that this correlation wasn't just a statistical fluke – it's as real as π in the world of mathematics. The probability of these findings occurring by pure chance is slim to none, which leads us to the question: what mysterious forces are at play here, interweaving political ideologies with the uproarious musings of math enthusiasts in the digital sphere?
But fear not, my dear colleagues! We don't expect you to take our word for it. What kind of researchers would we be if we didn't present you with an empirical demonstration of this dazzling correlation? Behold, Fig. 1 - a scatterplot that encapsulates the essence of this unexpected relationship between Republican votes in Georgia and the average number of comments on Stand-up Maths YouTube videos. Take a moment to appreciate the beauty of this scatterplot, for it encapsulates the whimsical intertwining of numbers and laughter that our statistical analysis has revealed.
In conclusion, our findings challenge the conventional wisdom surrounding political behavior and inject a dose of mathematical merriment into the equation. Who would have thought that the pitter-patter of YouTube comments and the ticking of ballots in a Georgia election could harmonize in such a statistically significant manner? This, my friends, exemplifies the delightful unpredictability of scientific inquiry and reminds us that sometimes, the most unexpected correlations can emerge from the unlikeliest of sources.
So, as we wrap up this data-driven escapade, let's tip our hats to the quirky, comedic side of statistics and acknowledge that in the world of research, the most unconventional pairings can yield the most captivating insights. After all, who knows what other statistical surprises await us in the uncharted territories of academia and YouTube comment sections?

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our research has illuminated a correlation between Republican votes in Georgia and the average number of comments on Stand-up Maths YouTube videos that is as surprising as discovering a "square root" beer at a political rally. The statistically significant connection between political preferences and math-related humor reveals that even in the labyrinth of statistical analysis, there's room for a little mirth and merriment. Who would have guessed that while politicians were advocating for policy change, the real heavy lifting was taking place in the comment section of mathematical comedy?
As we wrap up this whirlwind adventure, it's clear that this correlation is no statistical fluke - it's as real as a pie chart at a bakery. Our findings suggest that when it comes to political behavior, there might just be some "math-ematical" variables at play that we never even considered. It seems the laughter-inducing antics of math enthusiasts may indeed have a role in shaping political landscapes - a reminder that when it comes to statistical connections, we should always expect the unexpected.
So, as we bid adieu to this research endeavor, let's salute the remarkable interconnectedness of seemingly unrelated phenomena and embrace the joy of discovery in all its quirky, correlation-filled glory. In the immortal words of Albert Einstein, "Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age 18," and in the world of political and mathematical oddities, there is no room for such biases.
With that being said, we firmly assert that no further research is needed in this area. The statistical harmony and numerical shenanigans uncovered in this study shall stand as a lighthearted testament to the unpredictable and delightful nature of scientific inquiry.

And that, folks, is a wrap!


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 Laughing All the Way to the Ballot Box: An Analysis of Republican Votes in Georgia and Stand-up Maths YouTube Comments. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

Journal of Political Humor and Mathematical Musings


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 Laughing All the Way to the Ballot Box: An Analysis of Republican Votes in Georgia and Stand-up Maths YouTube Comments. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Institute for Political Comedy and Mathematical Analysis


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide potential search keywords separated by commas. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide potential search keywords for a paper titled Laughing All the Way to the Ballot Box: An Analysis of Republican Votes in Georgia and Stand-up Maths YouTube Comments with an abstract of In this study, we delve into the unexpected relationship between political preferences and mathematical humor. Using data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the ever-entertaining realm of YouTube, we set out to unravel the correlation between the number of votes for Republican Senators in Georgia and the average number of comments on Stand-up Maths YouTube videos. Our findings revealed a shockingly high correlation coefficient of 0.9734496 and p < 0.05 for the period spanning from 2011 to 2021. Yes, you read that right - there appears to be a striking link between political leanings and an affinity for math-related comedy. So, the next time you're crunching numbers at the ballot box, don't forget to factor in the humorous influence of YouTube comments. This research adds a whole new meaning to the phrase "number crunching" and demonstrates that when it comes to political behavior, there might just be some "math-ematical" variables at play that we never even considered!

ChatGPT:

Republican, votes, Georgia, Stand-up Maths, YouTube comments, political preferences, mathematical humor, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, correlation coefficient, Senate, election, data 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

Votes for Republican Senators in Georgia
Detailed data title: Percentage of votes cast for Federal Republican Senate candidates in Georgia
Source: MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse
See what else correlates with Votes for Republican Senators in Georgia

Average number of comments on Matt Parker's YouTube videos
Detailed data title: Average number of comments on Stand-up Maths YouTube videos.
Source: Stand-up Maths on YouTube
See what else correlates with Average number of comments on Matt Parker's YouTube videos

Correlation r = 0.9734496 (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 = 0.9476041 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 94.8% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Average number of comments on Matt Parker's YouTube videos) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Votes for Republican Senators in Georgia) over the 4 years from 2011 through 2021.

p < 0.05, which statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.027. 0.0265504035603267850000000000
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 0.97 in 2.7% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 38 random variables Which I absolutely did.
with the same 3 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 3 because we have two variables measured over a period of 4 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.

[ 0.19, 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.
2014201620202021
Votes for Republican Senators in Georgia (Percentage of votes)52.889154.783999.09698.3396
Average number of comments on Matt Parker's YouTube videos (Average Comments)1269.51821.2430523263.36




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([52.8891,54.7839,99.096,98.3396,])
array_2 = np.array([1269.5,1821.24,3052,3263.36,])
array_1_name = "Votes for Republican Senators in Georgia"
array_2_name = "Average number of comments on Matt Parker's 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 rating is pure awesomeness!


Correlation ID: 5095 · Black Variable ID: 26371 · Red Variable ID: 25796
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0