Download png, svg
AI explanation
Because every libertarian secretly wants to be a ninja turtle, and they saw Raphael as their radical, shell-kicking inspiration for political change! As his name rose in popularity, so did their belief in individual liberty and shelleconomic freedom. It was a radical correlation, but for these voters, Raphael was their hero in a half-shell, and they were ready to shell out their support for libertarian candidates in North Carolina!Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image of a futuristic North Carolina town square where a towering holographic billboard prominently displays the name "Raphael" in bold, glowing letters alongside an imposing image of the determined ninja turtle. A diverse group of passionate individuals, all wearing striking "Vote Libertarian" t-shirts, are gathered around the billboard, their actions and expressions exuding a palpable energy and sense of purpose. The scene should capture the fervor of their shared belief in individual liberty, augmenting the visual with hints of advanced technology and a sense of radical change on the horizon. 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: Popularity of the first name Raphael and Votes for Libertarian Senators in North Carolina. 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: Cute cartoon Art nouveau Celtic art Cyber folk Futuristic
ChatGPT: Futuristic
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 Popularity of the first name Raphael and Votes for Libertarian Senators in North Carolina, in the following situation: Because every libertarian secretly wants to be a ninja turtle, and they saw Raphael as their radical, shell-kicking inspiration for political change! As his name rose in popularity, so did their belief in individual liberty and shelleconomic freedom. It was a radical correlation, but for these voters, Raphael was their hero in a half-shell, and they were ready to shell out their support for libertarian candidates in North Carolina!. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a bustling town square in North Carolina, a large billboard proudly displays the name "Raphael" in bold, eye-catching letters alongside the image of a determined ninja turtle. A group of passionate individuals, donning "Vote Libertarian" t-shirts, gather around the billboard, energized by the spirit of individual liberty symbolized by the beloved turtle. As the name Raphael grows in popularity, so does the fervor of these supporters, eager to bring about radical change and promote their shared belief in shelleconomic freedom through their unwavering support for libertarian candidates in North Carolina.
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: [ Futuristic ] and depicting this scene: In a bustling town square in North Carolina, a large billboard proudly displays the name "Raphael" in bold, eye-catching letters alongside the image of a determined ninja turtle. A group of passionate individuals, donning "Vote Libertarian" t-shirts, gather around the billboard, energized by the spirit of individual liberty symbolized by the beloved turtle. As the name Raphael grows in popularity, so does the fervor of these supporters, eager to bring about radical change and promote their shared belief in shelleconomic freedom through their unwavering support for libertarian candidates in North Carolina. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image of a futuristic North Carolina town square where a towering holographic billboard prominently displays the name "Raphael" in bold, glowing letters alongside an imposing image of the determined ninja turtle. A diverse group of passionate individuals, all wearing striking "Vote Libertarian" t-shirts, are gathered around the billboard, their actions and expressions exuding a palpable energy and sense of purpose. The scene should capture the fervor of their shared belief in individual liberty, augmenting the visual with hints of advanced technology and a sense of radical change on the horizon.
*Variations in the User Prompts from chart to chart are just the result of random number generation in Python. I wrote a few arrays of various styles and methods to ask questions to change up the results. Every time this site writes an explanation or generates an image, the script picks from each at random.
I sequence the requests into multiple prompts because I find GPT 3.5 to perform much better with short, well-managed contexts. Thus, I track the context directly in Python and only ask ChatGPT targeted questions.
System prompt: You provide humorous responses in the form of plausible sounding explanations for correlations. You assume the correlation is causative for the purpose of the explanation even if it is ridiculous. You do not chat with the user, you only reply with the causal connection explanation and nothing else.
User prompt: Please make up a funny explanation for how an increase in Popularity of the first name Raphael caused Libertarian votes for Senators in North Carolina to increase. Include one good pun.
AI academic paper
Raphael's Right: An Examination of the Connection between the Popularity of the Name Raphael and Libertarian Votes for Senators in North Carolina The Journal of Quirky Correlations Jan 2024 Reminder: This paper is AI-generated. Not real! |
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly researcher writing an academic paper.You write titles and abstracts of goofy academic research papers.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, and add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Raphael and Libertarian votes for Senators in North Carolina. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.
Make the title punny if you can come up with clever pun. If not, just make it sound clever.
Your research team used data from US Social Security Administration and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9513253 and p < 0.01 for 1980 to 2020.
Please respond in this format (replace "Lorem ipsum dolor sit" with your title and abstract)
[[TITLE]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit
[[ABSTRACT]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit
ChatGPT:
[[TITLE]]
Raphael's Right: An Examination of the Connection between the Popularity of the Name Raphael and Libertarian Votes for Senators in North Carolina
[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper explores the intriguing relationship between the popularity of the name Raphael and libertarian votes for senators in the charming state of North Carolina. Merging data from the US Social Security Administration and the esteemed MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, our research team embarked on an academically perilous journey to unravel this enigmatic link.
Employing rigorous statistical analysis, we calculated a correlation coefficient of 0.9513253 and a p-value of less than 0.01 for the time span from 1980 to 2020. While the results may seem, pardon the pun, "incredible," they beckon further investigation and serve as a gentle reminder that correlation does not necessarily imply causation. Through this investigation, we hope to shed light on the delightful and unexpected associations that pepper the quizzical field of social trends and nomenclature.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly researcher writing an academic paper.You draft the introduction section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Raphael and Libertarian votes for Senators in North Carolina. 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]]
Raphael's Right: An Examination of the Connection between the Popularity of the Name Raphael and Libertarian Votes for Senators in North Carolina
[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper explores the intriguing relationship between the popularity of the name Raphael and libertarian votes for senators in the charming state of North Carolina. Merging data from the US Social Security Administration and the esteemed MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, our research team embarked on an academically perilous journey to unravel this enigmatic link.
Employing rigorous statistical analysis, we calculated a correlation coefficient of 0.9513253 and a p-value of less than 0.01 for the time span from 1980 to 2020. While the results may seem, pardon the pun, "incredible," they beckon further investigation and serve as a gentle reminder that correlation does not necessarily imply causation. Through this investigation, we hope to shed light on the delightful and unexpected associations that pepper the quizzical field of social trends and nomenclature.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
In the ever-evolving landscape of social and political studies, it is imperative to explore the peculiar and oftentimes inexplicable correlations that emerge from the amalgamation of human behavior, individual choices, and statistical data. The phenomenon of nomenclature and its potential impact on political preferences has long been an area of curious inquiry. Thus, it is with great excitement, and a generous sprinkle of curiosity, that we present our findings on the link between the popularity of the name Raphael and libertarian votes for senators in the picturesque state of North Carolina.
It is a well-known axiom in the world of scientific research that, much like a lab experiment, every research question must possess a variable to be scrutinized – in our case, the variable in question being the popularity of the name Raphael. The elegance, the rhythm, and the underlying charm of this name have intrigued humanity for centuries. Moreover, it is with a sense of whimsy and a dash of intrigue that we put forth the notion that perhaps, just perhaps, the naming trends of a bygone era may hold sway over the political preferences of today.
The state of North Carolina, with its breathtaking landscapes, vivacious culture, and rich political history, serves as a fitting backdrop for our investigation. The coalescence of these peculiarities may give rise to suppositions as to the potential correlation between the popularity of the name Raphael and libertarian voting patterns. As we delve into this enigmatic relationship, we can't help but marvel at the duality of our task – to uncover the hidden threads that tie together the seemingly unrelated whilst preserving the scholarly integrity of our research.
Our study, an amalgam of empirical data from the US Social Security Administration and the esteemed MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, is a testament to the enduring pursuit of knowledge. With our trusty statistical toolkit in hand, we ventured forth into the labyrinth of numbers, conducting analysis that would make even the most disheveled statistician nod in approval. What emerged from this journey of data mining, advanced algorithms, and late-night coffee binges is a correlation coefficient of 0.9513253 and a p-value that could make a statistician blush - less than 0.01. These results, much like a magician's trick, beckon both wonder and caution, hinting at the possibility of an unseen force at play.
Unearthing such a correlation led us to the witty observation that, much like the theories posited by economic models, correlation does not imply causation. The gentle reminder that we are dealing with human behavior, whimsy, and fickle trends is akin to navigating a ship in a tempest – thrilling and treacherous in equal measure. It is this delicate balance of rational inquiry and intellectual playfulness that propels our journey into the whimsical world of social trends and the names we carry.
As we embark on this academic escapade, we invite you to join us in unraveling the mystery of Raphael's right and the intriguing dance between nomenclature and political leanings. We hope that our findings, much like a well-told joke, will strike a chord of curiosity and spark further inquiry into the unforeseen connections that animate the tapestry of human society.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly researcher writing an academic paper.You draft a literature review section of an academic research paper, that starts out dry for the first few sentences but then becomes hilarious and goofy.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Raphael and Libertarian votes for Senators in North Carolina. 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 name some cartoons and childrens' shows that you watched that are related to the topic.
Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Raphael's Right: An Examination of the Connection between the Popularity of the Name Raphael and Libertarian Votes for Senators in North Carolina
[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper explores the intriguing relationship between the popularity of the name Raphael and libertarian votes for senators in the charming state of North Carolina. Merging data from the US Social Security Administration and the esteemed MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, our research team embarked on an academically perilous journey to unravel this enigmatic link.
Employing rigorous statistical analysis, we calculated a correlation coefficient of 0.9513253 and a p-value of less than 0.01 for the time span from 1980 to 2020. While the results may seem, pardon the pun, "incredible," they beckon further investigation and serve as a gentle reminder that correlation does not necessarily imply causation. Through this investigation, we hope to shed light on the delightful and unexpected associations that pepper the quizzical field of social trends and nomenclature.
-------
And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
In the ever-evolving landscape of social and political studies, it is imperative to explore the peculiar and oftentimes inexplicable correlations that emerge from the amalgamation of human behavior, individual choices, and statistical data. The phenomenon of nomenclature and its potential impact on political preferences has long been an area of curious inquiry. Thus, it is with great excitement, and a generous sprinkle of curiosity, that we present our findings on the link between the popularity of the name Raphael and libertarian votes for senators in the picturesque state of North Carolina.
It is a well-known axiom in the world of scientific research that, much like a lab experiment, every research question must possess a variable to be scrutinized – in our case, the variable in question being the popularity of the name Raphael. The elegance, the rhythm, and the underlying charm of this name have intrigued humanity for centuries. Moreover, it is with a sense of whimsy and a dash of intrigue that we put forth the notion that perhaps, just perhaps, the naming trends of a bygone era may hold sway over the political preferences of today.
The state of North Carolina, with its breathtaking landscapes, vivacious culture, and rich political history, serves as a fitting backdrop for our investigation. The coalescence of these peculiarities may give rise to suppositions as to the potential correlation between the popularity of the name Raphael and libertarian voting patterns. As we delve into this enigmatic relationship, we can't help but marvel at the duality of our task – to uncover the hidden threads that tie together the seemingly unrelated whilst preserving the scholarly integrity of our research.
Our study, an amalgam of empirical data from the US Social Security Administration and the esteemed MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, is a testament to the enduring pursuit of knowledge. With our trusty statistical toolkit in hand, we ventured forth into the labyrinth of numbers, conducting analysis that would make even the most disheveled statistician nod in approval. What emerged from this journey of data mining, advanced algorithms, and late-night coffee binges is a correlation coefficient of 0.9513253 and a p-value that could make a statistician blush - less than 0.01. These results, much like a magician's trick, beckon both wonder and caution, hinting at the possibility of an unseen force at play.
Unearthing such a correlation led us to the witty observation that, much like the theories posited by economic models, correlation does not imply causation. The gentle reminder that we are dealing with human behavior, whimsy, and fickle trends is akin to navigating a ship in a tempest – thrilling and treacherous in equal measure. It is this delicate balance of rational inquiry and intellectual playfulness that propels our journey into the whimsical world of social trends and the names we carry.
As we embark on this academic escapade, we invite you to join us in unraveling the mystery of Raphael's right and the intriguing dance between nomenclature and political leanings. We hope that our findings, much like a well-told joke, will strike a chord of curiosity and spark further inquiry into the unforeseen connections that animate the tapestry of human society.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
To comprehensively understand the peculiar relationship between the popularity of the name Raphael and libertarian votes for senators in North Carolina, it is imperative to first acknowledge the existing literature on social nomenclature and its implications on political behaviors. Studies by Smith (2015), Doe (2018), and Jones (2020) have delved into the intricate interplay between individual identities and political affiliations, laying the foundation for our investigation.
Smith's work offers insights into the psychological associations attached to names and how they may subconsciously influence decision-making processes. Doe's research delves into the historical evolution of naming trends and their resonance with prevailing ideologies, thereby offering a historical context to our endeavor. Jones' study, while focusing on a broader scope of naming conventions, draws attention to the potential societal implications of certain names and their unexpected correlations with diverse societal trends.
Building upon this scholarly foundation, we expand our purview to explore non-fiction works such as Malcolm Gladwell's "Outliers: The Story of Success" and Steven Levitt's "Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything." These works, while not directly addressing the relationship between nomenclature and political behaviors, provide valuable insights into the multifaceted nature of societal phenomena, shedding light on the pervasive influence of seemingly inconsequential factors.
The literary realm also offers intriguing perspectives on the impact of names and societal dynamics, with fictional works such as J.D. Salinger's "The Catcher in the Rye" and Suzanne Collins' "The Hunger Games" presenting nuanced explorations of identity and societal constructs. While these novels may not explicitly address the connection between names and political leanings, their thematic exploration of individual agency and societal influences provides valuable context for our investigation.
Furthermore, in order to capture the whimsical and vibrant nuances of nomenclature, it is essential to draw inspiration from cultural touchstones that permeate our collective consciousness. Cartoons and children's shows, such as "SpongeBob SquarePants" and "Scooby-Doo," subtly reflect societal attitudes and values, offering a lighthearted yet insightful lens through which to contemplate the enigmatic connections between names and behavioral patterns.
By incorporating these diverse sources into our literary tapestry, we seek to unravel the fascinating tapestry of associations that interweave names, political preferences, and societal dynamics, laying the groundwork for a spirited exploration of Raphael's right and its unexpected correlation with libertarian votes in North Carolina.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly researcher writing an academic paper.You draft the methodology section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Raphael and Libertarian votes for Senators in North Carolina. 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 US Social Security Administration and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse . You used data from 1980 to 2020
Make up the research methods you don't know. Make them a bit goofy and convoluted.
Here is the title, abstract, and introduction of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Raphael's Right: An Examination of the Connection between the Popularity of the Name Raphael and Libertarian Votes for Senators in North Carolina
[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper explores the intriguing relationship between the popularity of the name Raphael and libertarian votes for senators in the charming state of North Carolina. Merging data from the US Social Security Administration and the esteemed MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, our research team embarked on an academically perilous journey to unravel this enigmatic link.
Employing rigorous statistical analysis, we calculated a correlation coefficient of 0.9513253 and a p-value of less than 0.01 for the time span from 1980 to 2020. While the results may seem, pardon the pun, "incredible," they beckon further investigation and serve as a gentle reminder that correlation does not necessarily imply causation. Through this investigation, we hope to shed light on the delightful and unexpected associations that pepper the quizzical field of social trends and nomenclature.
[[INTRODUCTION]]
In the ever-evolving landscape of social and political studies, it is imperative to explore the peculiar and oftentimes inexplicable correlations that emerge from the amalgamation of human behavior, individual choices, and statistical data. The phenomenon of nomenclature and its potential impact on political preferences has long been an area of curious inquiry. Thus, it is with great excitement, and a generous sprinkle of curiosity, that we present our findings on the link between the popularity of the name Raphael and libertarian votes for senators in the picturesque state of North Carolina.
It is a well-known axiom in the world of scientific research that, much like a lab experiment, every research question must possess a variable to be scrutinized – in our case, the variable in question being the popularity of the name Raphael. The elegance, the rhythm, and the underlying charm of this name have intrigued humanity for centuries. Moreover, it is with a sense of whimsy and a dash of intrigue that we put forth the notion that perhaps, just perhaps, the naming trends of a bygone era may hold sway over the political preferences of today.
The state of North Carolina, with its breathtaking landscapes, vivacious culture, and rich political history, serves as a fitting backdrop for our investigation. The coalescence of these peculiarities may give rise to suppositions as to the potential correlation between the popularity of the name Raphael and libertarian voting patterns. As we delve into this enigmatic relationship, we can't help but marvel at the duality of our task – to uncover the hidden threads that tie together the seemingly unrelated whilst preserving the scholarly integrity of our research.
Our study, an amalgam of empirical data from the US Social Security Administration and the esteemed MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, is a testament to the enduring pursuit of knowledge. With our trusty statistical toolkit in hand, we ventured forth into the labyrinth of numbers, conducting analysis that would make even the most disheveled statistician nod in approval. What emerged from this journey of data mining, advanced algorithms, and late-night coffee binges is a correlation coefficient of 0.9513253 and a p-value that could make a statistician blush - less than 0.01. These results, much like a magician's trick, beckon both wonder and caution, hinting at the possibility of an unseen force at play.
Unearthing such a correlation led us to the witty observation that, much like the theories posited by economic models, correlation does not imply causation. The gentle reminder that we are dealing with human behavior, whimsy, and fickle trends is akin to navigating a ship in a tempest – thrilling and treacherous in equal measure. It is this delicate balance of rational inquiry and intellectual playfulness that propels our journey into the whimsical world of social trends and the names we carry.
As we embark on this academic escapade, we invite you to join us in unraveling the mystery of Raphael's right and the intriguing dance between nomenclature and political leanings. We hope that our findings, much like a well-told joke, will strike a chord of curiosity and spark further inquiry into the unforeseen connections that animate the tapestry of human society.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
ChatGPT:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
I. Data Collection
Our data collection phase involved navigating the labyrinthine corridors of the internet, with the sole mission of obtaining the birth records of individuals bearing the name Raphael from the US Social Security Administration, and the election results pertaining to libertarian votes for senators in North Carolina from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse. This rapacious pursuit led us to obscure websites, dusty archives, and the occasional encounter with conspiracy theories regarding the interplay of names and voting patterns. After an arduous quest fraught with technical hiccups and erratic internet connections, we emerged triumphantly with the requisite data from the period spanning 1980 to 2020.
II. Data Analysis
With our quiver of statistical tools at the ready, we set forth to wrangle the unwieldy datasets. Our analysis incorporated advanced regression models, time series analysis, and a sprinkle of magic from the statistical potion known as correlation analysis. The sheer complexity of our models led to more than a few evenings spent muttering incantations to the gods of data and silently pleading with the forces of statistical inference for clarity.
Taking into account the longitudinal nature of our inquiry, we employed sophisticated techniques to handle potential autocorrelation and heteroscedasticity, ensuring that our results remained robust in the face of statistical chicanery. Our analysis yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.9513253, signifying a strong linear relationship between the popularity of the name Raphael and libertarian votes for senators in North Carolina. The p-value, akin to a rare gem in the rough terrain of statistical analysis, was less than 0.01, prompting sighs of relief and the occasional victory dance in the laboratory.
III. Sensitivity Analysis
Sensitivity analyses were conducted to examine the stability of our findings under various scenarios and statistical assumptions. We subjected our data to the statistical equivalent of stress tests, simulating different permutations of outliers, variable transformations, and alternative model specifications. Interestingly, our findings remained unwavering, akin to a seasoned sailor weathering the tumultuous seas of statistical uncertainty.
IV. Robustness Checks
To further fortify the veracity of our results, robustness checks were executed with the precision of a well-honed fencing maneuver. These included bootstrapping techniques, Monte Carlo simulations, and the occasional consultation with a crystal ball – metaphorically speaking, of course. Remarkably, our results persisted unscathed, akin to a fortification impervious to the battering ram of statistical skepticism.
V. Limitations
It is essential to acknowledge the limitations encountered in our data collection and analysis. Limitations included potential recall bias in the reporting of names, the volatility of political preferences, and the inscrutable nature of human decision-making. Moreover, the findings derived from our investigation should be interpreted with caution, recognizing the nuanced interplay of confounding variables and the capricious nature of social phenomena.
VI. Ethical Considerations
Although our pursuit of knowledge was unyielding, ethical considerations were rigorously upheld. The privacy and confidentiality of individuals in our datasets were safeguarded with utmost diligence, ensuring that our scholarly endeavors remained ethically irreproachable.
VII. Reproducibility
To promote transparency and reproducibility, we pledge to make our datasets, code, and analytical procedures readily available to the academic community. It is our fervent hope that our quest into the whimsical world of nomenclature and political proclivities will inspire future researchers to embark on similar odysseys of intellectual curiosity.
VIII. Statistical Software
All statistical analyses were conducted using the formidable software packages, including R, SAS, and the occasional Python script for good measure. The interplay between our team and the statistical software required both discernment and patience, as we navigated the complex syntax and capricious idiosyncrasies of these tools with unfaltering resolve.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly researcher writing an academic paper.You draft the results section of an academic research paper. You speak in the past tense (you found...).
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Raphael and Libertarian votes for Senators in North Carolina. 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 US Social Security Administration and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse .
For the time period 1980 to 2020, you found a correlation 0.9513253, r-squared of 0.9050198, 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]]
Raphael's Right: An Examination of the Connection between the Popularity of the Name Raphael and Libertarian Votes for Senators in North Carolina
[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper explores the intriguing relationship between the popularity of the name Raphael and libertarian votes for senators in the charming state of North Carolina. Merging data from the US Social Security Administration and the esteemed MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, our research team embarked on an academically perilous journey to unravel this enigmatic link.
Employing rigorous statistical analysis, we calculated a correlation coefficient of 0.9513253 and a p-value of less than 0.01 for the time span from 1980 to 2020. While the results may seem, pardon the pun, "incredible," they beckon further investigation and serve as a gentle reminder that correlation does not necessarily imply causation. Through this investigation, we hope to shed light on the delightful and unexpected associations that pepper the quizzical field of social trends and nomenclature.
-------
And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
In the ever-evolving landscape of social and political studies, it is imperative to explore the peculiar and oftentimes inexplicable correlations that emerge from the amalgamation of human behavior, individual choices, and statistical data. The phenomenon of nomenclature and its potential impact on political preferences has long been an area of curious inquiry. Thus, it is with great excitement, and a generous sprinkle of curiosity, that we present our findings on the link between the popularity of the name Raphael and libertarian votes for senators in the picturesque state of North Carolina.
It is a well-known axiom in the world of scientific research that, much like a lab experiment, every research question must possess a variable to be scrutinized – in our case, the variable in question being the popularity of the name Raphael. The elegance, the rhythm, and the underlying charm of this name have intrigued humanity for centuries. Moreover, it is with a sense of whimsy and a dash of intrigue that we put forth the notion that perhaps, just perhaps, the naming trends of a bygone era may hold sway over the political preferences of today.
The state of North Carolina, with its breathtaking landscapes, vivacious culture, and rich political history, serves as a fitting backdrop for our investigation. The coalescence of these peculiarities may give rise to suppositions as to the potential correlation between the popularity of the name Raphael and libertarian voting patterns. As we delve into this enigmatic relationship, we can't help but marvel at the duality of our task – to uncover the hidden threads that tie together the seemingly unrelated whilst preserving the scholarly integrity of our research.
Our study, an amalgam of empirical data from the US Social Security Administration and the esteemed MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, is a testament to the enduring pursuit of knowledge. With our trusty statistical toolkit in hand, we ventured forth into the labyrinth of numbers, conducting analysis that would make even the most disheveled statistician nod in approval. What emerged from this journey of data mining, advanced algorithms, and late-night coffee binges is a correlation coefficient of 0.9513253 and a p-value that could make a statistician blush - less than 0.01. These results, much like a magician's trick, beckon both wonder and caution, hinting at the possibility of an unseen force at play.
Unearthing such a correlation led us to the witty observation that, much like the theories posited by economic models, correlation does not imply causation. The gentle reminder that we are dealing with human behavior, whimsy, and fickle trends is akin to navigating a ship in a tempest – thrilling and treacherous in equal measure. It is this delicate balance of rational inquiry and intellectual playfulness that propels our journey into the whimsical world of social trends and the names we carry.
As we embark on this academic escapade, we invite you to join us in unraveling the mystery of Raphael's right and the intriguing dance between nomenclature and political leanings. We hope that our findings, much like a well-told joke, will strike a chord of curiosity and spark further inquiry into the unforeseen connections that animate the tapestry of human society.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[RESULTS]]
ChatGPT:
[[RESULTS]]
The statistical analysis conducted on the data gathered from the US Social Security Administration and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse revealed a striking correlation between the popularity of the name Raphael and libertarian votes for senators in North Carolina. Over the period from 1980 to 2020, a correlation coefficient of 0.9513253, an r-squared of 0.9050198, and a p-value of less than 0.01 were calculated, indicating a robust and statistically significant relationship.
Notably, the scatterplot (Fig. 1) displayed a pattern that can only be described as a "match" between the two variables, and not just in the romantic sense. The upward trend on the graph was a sight to behold, much like witnessing a perfect high-five between data points.
Our results underscore the unmistakable connection between the historical popularity of the name Raphael and the propensity of North Carolinians to pull the lever in favor of libertarian candidates. One might even say that the correlation is as clear as the azure skies of the Outer Banks – though, of course, we cannot discount the central role of statistical rigor in ascribing causation to such a correlation.
In a world brimming with surprises, our findings serve as a gentle reminder of the whimsical and, at times, confounding nature of social trends. They evoke a whimsical charm, akin to stumbling upon an unexpected punchline in the annals of human behavior and naming conventions - a reminder that in the intricate ballet of societal dynamics, the unlikeliest of partners may indeed, quite merrily, take the floor.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly researcher writing an academic paper.You draft the discussion section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Raphael and Libertarian votes for Senators in North Carolina. 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]]
Raphael's Right: An Examination of the Connection between the Popularity of the Name Raphael and Libertarian Votes for Senators in North Carolina
[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper explores the intriguing relationship between the popularity of the name Raphael and libertarian votes for senators in the charming state of North Carolina. Merging data from the US Social Security Administration and the esteemed MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, our research team embarked on an academically perilous journey to unravel this enigmatic link.
Employing rigorous statistical analysis, we calculated a correlation coefficient of 0.9513253 and a p-value of less than 0.01 for the time span from 1980 to 2020. While the results may seem, pardon the pun, "incredible," they beckon further investigation and serve as a gentle reminder that correlation does not necessarily imply causation. Through this investigation, we hope to shed light on the delightful and unexpected associations that pepper the quizzical field of social trends and nomenclature.
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
To comprehensively understand the peculiar relationship between the popularity of the name Raphael and libertarian votes for senators in North Carolina, it is imperative to first acknowledge the existing literature on social nomenclature and its implications on political behaviors. Studies by Smith (2015), Doe (2018), and Jones (2020) have delved into the intricate interplay between individual identities and political affiliations, laying the foundation for our investigation.
Smith's work offers insights into the psychological associations attached to names and how they may subconsciously influence decision-making processes. Doe's research delves into the historical evolution of naming trends and their resonance with prevailing ideologies, thereby offering a historical context to our endeavor. Jones' study, while focusing on a broader scope of naming conventions, draws attention to the potential societal implications of certain names and their unexpected correlations with diverse societal trends.
Building upon this scholarly foundation, we expand our purview to explore non-fiction works such as Malcolm Gladwell's "Outliers: The Story of Success" and Steven Levitt's "Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything." These works, while not directly addressing the relationship between nomenclature and political behaviors, provide valuable insights into the multifaceted nature of societal phenomena, shedding light on the pervasive influence of seemingly inconsequential factors.
The literary realm also offers intriguing perspectives on the impact of names and societal dynamics, with fictional works such as J.D. Salinger's "The Catcher in the Rye" and Suzanne Collins' "The Hunger Games" presenting nuanced explorations of identity and societal constructs. While these novels may not explicitly address the connection between names and political leanings, their thematic exploration of individual agency and societal influences provides valuable context for our investigation.
Furthermore, in order to capture the whimsical and vibrant nuances of nomenclature, it is essential to draw inspiration from cultural touchstones that permeate our collective consciousness. Cartoons and children's shows, such as "SpongeBob SquarePants" and "Scooby-Doo," subtly reflect societal attitudes and values, offering a lighthearted yet insightful lens through which to contemplate the enigmatic connections between names and behavioral patterns.
By incorporating these diverse sources into our literary tapestry, we seek to unravel the fascinating tapestry of associations that interweave names, political preferences, and societal dynamics, laying the groundwork for a spirited exploration of Raphael's right and its unexpected correlation with libertarian votes in North Carolina.
[[RESULTS]]
The statistical analysis conducted on the data gathered from the US Social Security Administration and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse revealed a striking correlation between the popularity of the name Raphael and libertarian votes for senators in North Carolina. Over the period from 1980 to 2020, a correlation coefficient of 0.9513253, an r-squared of 0.9050198, and a p-value of less than 0.01 were calculated, indicating a robust and statistically significant relationship.
Notably, the scatterplot (Fig. 1) displayed a pattern that can only be described as a "match" between the two variables, and not just in the romantic sense. The upward trend on the graph was a sight to behold, much like witnessing a perfect high-five between data points.
Our results underscore the unmistakable connection between the historical popularity of the name Raphael and the propensity of North Carolinians to pull the lever in favor of libertarian candidates. One might even say that the correlation is as clear as the azure skies of the Outer Banks – though, of course, we cannot discount the central role of statistical rigor in ascribing causation to such a correlation.
In a world brimming with surprises, our findings serve as a gentle reminder of the whimsical and, at times, confounding nature of social trends. They evoke a whimsical charm, akin to stumbling upon an unexpected punchline in the annals of human behavior and naming conventions - a reminder that in the intricate ballet of societal dynamics, the unlikeliest of partners may indeed, quite merrily, take the floor.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[DISCUSSION]]
ChatGPT:
[[DISCUSSION]]
The results of our investigation have unveiled an unexpected yet captivating relationship between the popularity of the name Raphael and libertarian votes for senators in North Carolina. Alas, much like the emergence of a rare unicorn in a statistically inclined forest, this correlation bewitches the mind and ensnares the senses.
In support of our previous goofily discussed literature, our results corroborate the findings of Smith (2015), Doe (2018), and Jones (2020) in a manner that can only be described as "epic." The connection between nomenclature and political proclivities is indeed as real as a rare specimen in a laboratory, confirming the pivotal role of individual identities in shaping electoral inclinations. This curious correlation has waltzed its way into the realm of social trends and naming conventions, leaving us to marvel at the serendipitous synchronicity that dances between names and behavioral propensities.
While some may view our findings as improbable as a unicorn trotting through a mathematical equation, they beckon a closer examination of the intricate interplay between personal identifiers and political choices. Our results reflect the cheeky unpredictability that often defines the landscape of social phenomena, akin to a laughing hyena in the solemn jungle of statistical analyses. In the ever-evolving narrative of human behavior, the allure of unexpected correlations reminds us of the inimitable whimsy that punctuates the multifaceted dance of societal dynamics.
In conclusion, our findings tantalize the intellect, much like the enticing aroma of a freshly brewed cup of scholarly discourse. They beckon a deeper exploration of the enigmatic interweaving of nomenclature and political leanings, encouraging further research into the delightful unpredictability that characterizes the world of social trends. As we bid adieu to this riveting discussion, we are left with a delightful sense of wonder – akin to stumbling upon an unsuspecting punchline in the vast expanse of human behavior and societal constructs.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly researcher writing an academic paper.You draft the discussion section of goofy academic research papers that sounds like it belongs based on the title and abstract provided.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Raphael and Libertarian votes for Senators in North Carolina. 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]]
Raphael's Right: An Examination of the Connection between the Popularity of the Name Raphael and Libertarian Votes for Senators in North Carolina
[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper explores the intriguing relationship between the popularity of the name Raphael and libertarian votes for senators in the charming state of North Carolina. Merging data from the US Social Security Administration and the esteemed MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, our research team embarked on an academically perilous journey to unravel this enigmatic link.
Employing rigorous statistical analysis, we calculated a correlation coefficient of 0.9513253 and a p-value of less than 0.01 for the time span from 1980 to 2020. While the results may seem, pardon the pun, "incredible," they beckon further investigation and serve as a gentle reminder that correlation does not necessarily imply causation. Through this investigation, we hope to shed light on the delightful and unexpected associations that pepper the quizzical field of social trends and nomenclature.
[[INTRDUCTION]]
In the ever-evolving landscape of social and political studies, it is imperative to explore the peculiar and oftentimes inexplicable correlations that emerge from the amalgamation of human behavior, individual choices, and statistical data. The phenomenon of nomenclature and its potential impact on political preferences has long been an area of curious inquiry. Thus, it is with great excitement, and a generous sprinkle of curiosity, that we present our findings on the link between the popularity of the name Raphael and libertarian votes for senators in the picturesque state of North Carolina.
It is a well-known axiom in the world of scientific research that, much like a lab experiment, every research question must possess a variable to be scrutinized – in our case, the variable in question being the popularity of the name Raphael. The elegance, the rhythm, and the underlying charm of this name have intrigued humanity for centuries. Moreover, it is with a sense of whimsy and a dash of intrigue that we put forth the notion that perhaps, just perhaps, the naming trends of a bygone era may hold sway over the political preferences of today.
The state of North Carolina, with its breathtaking landscapes, vivacious culture, and rich political history, serves as a fitting backdrop for our investigation. The coalescence of these peculiarities may give rise to suppositions as to the potential correlation between the popularity of the name Raphael and libertarian voting patterns. As we delve into this enigmatic relationship, we can't help but marvel at the duality of our task – to uncover the hidden threads that tie together the seemingly unrelated whilst preserving the scholarly integrity of our research.
Our study, an amalgam of empirical data from the US Social Security Administration and the esteemed MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, is a testament to the enduring pursuit of knowledge. With our trusty statistical toolkit in hand, we ventured forth into the labyrinth of numbers, conducting analysis that would make even the most disheveled statistician nod in approval. What emerged from this journey of data mining, advanced algorithms, and late-night coffee binges is a correlation coefficient of 0.9513253 and a p-value that could make a statistician blush - less than 0.01. These results, much like a magician's trick, beckon both wonder and caution, hinting at the possibility of an unseen force at play.
Unearthing such a correlation led us to the witty observation that, much like the theories posited by economic models, correlation does not imply causation. The gentle reminder that we are dealing with human behavior, whimsy, and fickle trends is akin to navigating a ship in a tempest – thrilling and treacherous in equal measure. It is this delicate balance of rational inquiry and intellectual playfulness that propels our journey into the whimsical world of social trends and the names we carry.
As we embark on this academic escapade, we invite you to join us in unraveling the mystery of Raphael's right and the intriguing dance between nomenclature and political leanings. We hope that our findings, much like a well-told joke, will strike a chord of curiosity and spark further inquiry into the unforeseen connections that animate the tapestry of human society.
[[RESULTS]]
The statistical analysis conducted on the data gathered from the US Social Security Administration and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse revealed a striking correlation between the popularity of the name Raphael and libertarian votes for senators in North Carolina. Over the period from 1980 to 2020, a correlation coefficient of 0.9513253, an r-squared of 0.9050198, and a p-value of less than 0.01 were calculated, indicating a robust and statistically significant relationship.
Notably, the scatterplot (Fig. 1) displayed a pattern that can only be described as a "match" between the two variables, and not just in the romantic sense. The upward trend on the graph was a sight to behold, much like witnessing a perfect high-five between data points.
Our results underscore the unmistakable connection between the historical popularity of the name Raphael and the propensity of North Carolinians to pull the lever in favor of libertarian candidates. One might even say that the correlation is as clear as the azure skies of the Outer Banks – though, of course, we cannot discount the central role of statistical rigor in ascribing causation to such a correlation.
In a world brimming with surprises, our findings serve as a gentle reminder of the whimsical and, at times, confounding nature of social trends. They evoke a whimsical charm, akin to stumbling upon an unexpected punchline in the annals of human behavior and naming conventions - a reminder that in the intricate ballet of societal dynamics, the unlikeliest of partners may indeed, quite merrily, take the floor.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[CONCLUSION]]
ChatGPT:
[[CONCLUSION]]
Our investigation into the correlation between the popularity of the name Raphael and libertarian votes for senators in North Carolina has unveiled a fascinating, albeit eyebrow-raising connection. The robust statistical analysis we conducted from data spanning from 1980 to 2020 has shown a correlation coefficient of 0.9513253, leaving us with the feeling that, much like the name itself, this relationship exudes an air of timeless mystery and charm.
The patterns observed in the scatterplot, which can only be described as a "match" between the two variables, leave us pondering the possibility that there may indeed be some unforeseen cosmic force at play here--though, we aren't discounting the potency of statistical wizardry.
In the grand scheme of things, our aim was not just to unearth numbers and equations but to unravel the enigmatic dance between nomenclature and political persuasions. And as we wrap up this paper, we can't help but savor the delightful irony of discovering such compelling results rooted in the whimsical world of human names and political whims. Perhaps further study would reveal even more surprising associations, like finding a rare coin in an old, forgotten jacket pocket.
However, and with a tinge of reluctant disappointment, we must assert that, much like a final quip in a stand-up comedy routine, no more research is needed in this domain. Our findings, while extraordinary, paint a vivid picture of the captivating interplay between the name Raphael and the burgeoning votes for libertarian senators in North Carolina. And much like a good punchline, we leave this subject with a lingering smile, confident that we have uncovered a delightful anomaly in the dance of human society.
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 Raphael's Right: An Examination of the Connection between the Popularity of the Name Raphael and Libertarian Votes for Senators in North Carolina. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.
ChatGPT:
The Journal of Quirky Correlations
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of nonprofit research organizations and associations. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding nonprofit, academic, or scientific association or organization that would sponsor research that resulted in a paper entited Raphael's Right: An Examination of the Connection between the Popularity of the Name Raphael and Libertarian Votes for Senators in North Carolina. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.
ChatGPT:
The Society for Advanced Name-Association Research (SANAR)
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 Raphael's Right: An Examination of the Connection between the Popularity of the Name Raphael and Libertarian Votes for Senators in North Carolina with an abstract of This paper explores the intriguing relationship between the popularity of the name Raphael and libertarian votes for senators in the charming state of North Carolina. Merging data from the US Social Security Administration and the esteemed MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, our research team embarked on an academically perilous journey to unravel this enigmatic link.
Employing rigorous statistical analysis, we calculated a correlation coefficient of 0.9513253 and a p-value of less than 0.01 for the time span from 1980 to 2020. While the results may seem, pardon the pun, "incredible," they beckon further investigation and serve as a gentle reminder that correlation does not necessarily imply causation. Through this investigation, we hope to shed light on the delightful and unexpected associations that pepper the quizzical field of social trends and nomenclature.
ChatGPT:
Raphael, popularity, name, libertarian votes, senators, North Carolina, US Social Security Administration, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, correlation coefficient, statistical analysis, causation, social trends, nomenclature
*There is a bunch of Python happening behind the scenes to turn this prompt sequence into a PDF.
Discover a new correlation
View all correlations
View all research papers
Report an error
Data details
Popularity of the first name RaphaelDetailed data title: Babies of all sexes born in the US named Raphael
Source: US Social Security Administration
See what else correlates with Popularity of the first name Raphael
Votes for Libertarian Senators in North Carolina
Detailed data title: Total number of votes cast for Federal Libertarian Senate candidates in North Carolina
Source: MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse
See what else correlates with Votes for Libertarian Senators in North Carolina
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 = 0.9050198 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 90.5% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Votes for Libertarian Senators in North Carolina) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Popularity of the first name Raphael) over the 12 years from 1980 through 2020.
p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 2.0E-6. 0.0000019824615702354810000000
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 0.0002% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 504,423 random variables You don't actually need 504 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 11 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 11 because we have two variables measured over a period of 12 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.
[ 0.83, 0.99 ] 95% correlation confidence interval (using the Fisher z-transformation)
The confidence interval is an estimate the range of the value of the correlation coefficient, using the correlation itself as an input. The values are meant to be the low and high end of the correlation coefficient with 95% confidence.
This one is a bit more complciated than the other calculations, but I include it because many people have been pushing for confidence intervals instead of p-value calculations (for example: NEJM. However, if you are dredging data, you can reliably find yourself in the 5%. That's my goal!
All values for the years included above: If I were being very sneaky, I could trim years from the beginning or end of the datasets to increase the correlation on some pairs of variables. I don't do that because there are already plenty of correlations in my database without monkeying with the years.
Still, sometimes one of the variables has more years of data available than the other. This page only shows the overlapping years. To see all the years, click on "See what else correlates with..." link above.
1980 | 1984 | 1992 | 1996 | 1998 | 2002 | 2004 | 2008 | 2010 | 2014 | 2016 | 2020 | |
Popularity of the first name Raphael (Babies born) | 158 | 214 | 311 | 254 | 262 | 269 | 304 | 397 | 368 | 461 | 550 | 559 |
Votes for Libertarian Senators in North Carolina (Total votes) | 7602 | 9302 | 85948 | 25396 | 36963 | 33807 | 47743 | 133430 | 55687 | 109100 | 167592 | 171571 |
Why this works
- Data dredging: I have 25,153 variables in my database. I compare all these variables against each other to find ones that randomly match up. That's 632,673,409 correlation calculations! This is called “data dredging.” Instead of starting with a hypothesis and testing it, I instead abused the data to see what correlations shake out. It’s a dangerous way to go about analysis, because any sufficiently large dataset will yield strong correlations completely at random.
- Lack of causal connection: There is probably
Because these pages are automatically generated, it's possible that the two variables you are viewing are in fact causually related. I take steps to prevent the obvious ones from showing on the site (I don't let data about the weather in one city correlate with the weather in a neighboring city, for example), but sometimes they still pop up. If they are related, cool! You found a loophole.
no direct connection between these variables, despite what the AI says above. This is exacerbated by the fact that I used "Years" as the base variable. Lots of things happen in a year that are not related to each other! Most studies would use something like "one person" in stead of "one year" to be the "thing" studied. - Observations not independent: For many variables, sequential years are not independent of each other. If a population of people is continuously doing something every day, there is no reason to think they would suddenly change how they are doing that thing on January 1. A simple
Personally I don't find any p-value calculation to be 'simple,' but you know what I mean.
p-value calculation does not take this into account, so mathematically it appears less probable than it really is. - 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.
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([158,214,311,254,262,269,304,397,368,461,550,559,])
array_2 = np.array([7602,9302,85948,25396,36963,33807,47743,133430,55687,109100,167592,171571,])
array_1_name = "Popularity of the first name Raphael"
array_2_name = "Votes for Libertarian Senators in North Carolina"
# Perform the calculation
print(f"Calculating the correlation between {array_1_name} and {array_2_name}...")
correlation, r_squared, p_value = calculate_correlation(array_1, array_2)
# Print the results
print("Correlation Coefficient:", correlation)
print("R-squared:", r_squared)
print("P-value:", p_value)
Reuseable content
You may re-use the images on this page for any purpose, even commercial purposes, without asking for permission. The only requirement is that you attribute Tyler Vigen. Attribution can take many different forms. If you leave the "tylervigen.com" link in the image, that satisfies it just fine. If you remove it and move it to a footnote, that's fine too. You can also just write "Charts courtesy of Tyler Vigen" at the bottom of an article.You do not need to attribute "the spurious correlations website," and you don't even need to link here if you don't want to. I don't gain anything from pageviews. There are no ads on this site, there is nothing for sale, and I am not for hire.
For the record, I am just one person. Tyler Vigen, he/him/his. I do have degrees, but they should not go after my name unless you want to annoy my wife. If that is your goal, then go ahead and cite me as "Tyler Vigen, A.A. A.A.S. B.A. J.D." Otherwise it is just "Tyler Vigen."
When spoken, my last name is pronounced "vegan," like I don't eat meat.
Full license details.
For more on re-use permissions, or to get a signed release form, see tylervigen.com/permission.
Download images for these variables:
- High resolution line chart
The image linked here is a Scalable Vector Graphic (SVG). It is the highest resolution that is possible to achieve. It scales up beyond the size of the observable universe without pixelating. You do not need to email me asking if I have a higher resolution image. I do not. The physical limitations of our universe prevent me from providing you with an image that is any higher resolution than this one.
If you insert it into a PowerPoint presentation (a tool well-known for managing things that are the scale of the universe), you can right-click > "Ungroup" or "Create Shape" and then edit the lines and text directly. You can also change the colors this way.
Alternatively you can use a tool like Inkscape. - High resolution line chart, optimized for mobile
- Alternative high resolution line chart
- Scatterplot
- Portable line chart (png)
- Portable line chart (png), optimized for mobile
- Line chart for only Popularity of the first name Raphael
- Line chart for only Votes for Libertarian Senators in North Carolina
- AI-generated correlation image
- The spurious research paper: Raphael's Right: An Examination of the Connection between the Popularity of the Name Raphael and Libertarian Votes for Senators in North Carolina
Kudos for rating!
Correlation ID: 5248 · Black Variable ID: 3409 · Red Variable ID: 26291