Download png, svg
AI explanation
It turns out that every time someone named Killian made a new friend or fan, they insisted on giving them a "vote" in their own personal libertarian utopia. So really, it's a case of name-based micro-politics.Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image of a bustling town square in Kansas. In the center, depict a young man named Killian surrounded by an enthusiastic group of new friends, each receiving a small slip of paper from him. Ensure that the Libertarian Presidential candidate's campaign banner proudly waves in the background, drawing curious glances from passersby. This should be depicted in a lighthearted and humorous manner, with a style similar to that of popular images found on Reddit. 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 Killian and Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Kansas. 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: Cyberpunk Magic realism Concept art Scalar art a funny image you would see on reddit
ChatGPT: a funny image you would see on reddit
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 Killian and Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Kansas, in the following situation: It turns out that every time someone named Killian made a new friend or fan, they insisted on giving them a "vote" in their own personal libertarian utopia. So really, it's a case of name-based micro-politics.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a bustling town square in Kansas, a young man named Killian is surrounded by a group of enthusiastic new friends, all of whom he has just met. As they gather around him, he hands each of them a small slip of paper, representing their "vote" in his personal libertarian utopia. Meanwhile, in the background, the Libertarian Presidential candidate's campaign banner waves proudly in the wind, drawing curious glances from passersby.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You write and improve image generation prompts for DALLE-3. You maintain the same subjects, but enhance the visuals.
User prompt: Please respond with an image generation prompt that would be likely to create an interesting visual using DALLE-3, using the following style: [ a funny image you would see on reddit ] and depicting this scene: In a bustling town square in Kansas, a young man named Killian is surrounded by a group of enthusiastic new friends, all of whom he has just met. As they gather around him, he hands each of them a small slip of paper, representing their "vote" in his personal libertarian utopia. Meanwhile, in the background, the Libertarian Presidential candidate's campaign banner waves proudly in the wind, drawing curious glances from passersby. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image of a bustling town square in Kansas. In the center, depict a young man named Killian surrounded by an enthusiastic group of new friends, each receiving a small slip of paper from him. Ensure that the Libertarian Presidential candidate's campaign banner proudly waves in the background, drawing curious glances from passersby. This should be depicted in a lighthearted and humorous manner, with a style similar to that of popular images found on Reddit.
*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 Killian caused Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Kansas to increase.
AI academic paper
Killian It at the Ballot Box: An Examination of the Name's Influence on Libertarian Votes in Kansas The Journal of Quirky Political Psychology Jan 2024 Reminder: This paper is AI-generated. Not real! |
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 Popularity of the first name Killian and Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Kansas. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.
Make the title punny if you can come up with clever pun. If not, make it sound serious.
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 0.9550334 and p < 0.01 for 1982 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]]
"Killian It at the Ballot Box: An Examination of the Name's Influence on Libertarian Votes in Kansas"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper presents a quirky yet compelling analysis of the relationship between the popularity of the first name Killian and votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in the state of Kansas. Drawing from data sets provided by the US Social Security Administration, as well as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab and Harvard Dataverse, our research team endeavored to unravel this peculiar connection. To our surprise, we uncovered a strong correlation coefficient of 0.9550334, with a significance level of p < 0.01, spanning the years 1982 to 2020. The implications of our findings are as fascinating as they are improbable, shedding light on the inexplicable sway of nomenclature on political preferences. In our exploration of this uncharted territory, we offer humor, statistical rigor, and a unique perspective, highlighting the sometimes whimsical nature of human behavior and decision-making.
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 Popularity of the first name Killian and Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Kansas. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.
Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Killian It at the Ballot Box: An Examination of the Name's Influence on Libertarian Votes in Kansas"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper presents a quirky yet compelling analysis of the relationship between the popularity of the first name Killian and votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in the state of Kansas. Drawing from data sets provided by the US Social Security Administration, as well as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab and Harvard Dataverse, our research team endeavored to unravel this peculiar connection. To our surprise, we uncovered a strong correlation coefficient of 0.9550334, with a significance level of p < 0.01, spanning the years 1982 to 2020. The implications of our findings are as fascinating as they are improbable, shedding light on the inexplicable sway of nomenclature on political preferences. In our exploration of this uncharted territory, we offer humor, statistical rigor, and a unique perspective, highlighting the sometimes whimsical nature of human behavior and decision-making.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The human experience is rife with curious enigmas, some more perplexing than others. How certain monikers can seemingly stealthily influence political leanings is just one of these mind-boggling conundrums. In this paper, we venture into the uncharted waters of name-association and its improbable correlation with political affiliations. Specifically, we delve into the magnetic allure of the first name "Killian" and its seemingly inexplicable connection to votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in the sunflower state of Kansas.
As if pulled straight from the annals of an absurdist comedy, our investigation uncovers a statistically robust relationship between the estimated number of individuals bearing the name Killian and the votes garnered by the Libertarian presidential candidate in Kansas. Our findings unveil a correlation coefficient of 0.9550334, with a significance level as compelling as a magician's sleight of hand, at p < 0.01, spanning the peculiarly specific epoch of 1982 to 2020.
But, before we plunge headfirst into this realm of whimsy and wonder, it is worth pondering the broader implications of our inquiry. Could it be that, in the labyrinthine corridors of the electorate's minds, lies a predilection for candidates based not on their policies or track record, but rather on the sonorous syllables of their given names? Are voters, consciously or subconsciously, swayed by the melodic ripples of certain nomenclature, transforming the political landscape into a surrealist's dream?
In the spirit of scholarly inquiry veiled in a cloak of levity, we embark on this odyssey of witticisms and empirical rigor, seeking to unravel the whimsical threads that bind the seemingly incongruous worlds of nomenclature and politics. Join us on this delightful yet intellectually rigorous escapade as we attempt to make sense of the nonsensical in the realm of voter behavior and the quirk of nomenclature.
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 Popularity of the first name Killian and Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Kansas. 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 name a couple popular internet memes that are related to one of the topics.
Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Killian It at the Ballot Box: An Examination of the Name's Influence on Libertarian Votes in Kansas"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper presents a quirky yet compelling analysis of the relationship between the popularity of the first name Killian and votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in the state of Kansas. Drawing from data sets provided by the US Social Security Administration, as well as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab and Harvard Dataverse, our research team endeavored to unravel this peculiar connection. To our surprise, we uncovered a strong correlation coefficient of 0.9550334, with a significance level of p < 0.01, spanning the years 1982 to 2020. The implications of our findings are as fascinating as they are improbable, shedding light on the inexplicable sway of nomenclature on political preferences. In our exploration of this uncharted territory, we offer humor, statistical rigor, and a unique perspective, highlighting the sometimes whimsical nature of human behavior and decision-making.
-------
And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The human experience is rife with curious enigmas, some more perplexing than others. How certain monikers can seemingly stealthily influence political leanings is just one of these mind-boggling conundrums. In this paper, we venture into the uncharted waters of name-association and its improbable correlation with political affiliations. Specifically, we delve into the magnetic allure of the first name "Killian" and its seemingly inexplicable connection to votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in the sunflower state of Kansas.
As if pulled straight from the annals of an absurdist comedy, our investigation uncovers a statistically robust relationship between the estimated number of individuals bearing the name Killian and the votes garnered by the Libertarian presidential candidate in Kansas. Our findings unveil a correlation coefficient of 0.9550334, with a significance level as compelling as a magician's sleight of hand, at p < 0.01, spanning the peculiarly specific epoch of 1982 to 2020.
But, before we plunge headfirst into this realm of whimsy and wonder, it is worth pondering the broader implications of our inquiry. Could it be that, in the labyrinthine corridors of the electorate's minds, lies a predilection for candidates based not on their policies or track record, but rather on the sonorous syllables of their given names? Are voters, consciously or subconsciously, swayed by the melodic ripples of certain nomenclature, transforming the political landscape into a surrealist's dream?
In the spirit of scholarly inquiry veiled in a cloak of levity, we embark on this odyssey of witticisms and empirical rigor, seeking to unravel the whimsical threads that bind the seemingly incongruous worlds of nomenclature and politics. Join us on this delightful yet intellectually rigorous escapade as we attempt to make sense of the nonsensical in the realm of voter behavior and the quirk of nomenclature.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
Previous research on the relationship between names and political affiliations has primarily focused on traditional, widely-used monikers. Smith and Doe (2018) delved into the intersection of first names and political leanings, examining the classic names John and Mary in their seminal work "The Political Pseudoscience of Names." Their analysis revealed intriguing correlations but failed to explore the potential impact of more eccentric names on electoral behavior. Similarly, Jones (2015) explored the influence of surnames on political donations in "The Surname Effect: A Study of Political Contributions," providing valuable insights into the impact of familial lineage on political engagement.
As we dig into the literature, we transition from the serious to the whimsical, delving into unexpected avenues of inquiry. "Freakonomics" by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner (2005) offers a tantalizing exploration of seemingly unrelated factors influencing human behavior, preparing our minds to embrace the offbeat connection between a name and political preferences. Following this trail of unconventional thinking, "The Tipping Point" by Malcolm Gladwell (2000) propels our understanding of the quirky and unpredictable nature of social phenomena, undoubtedly resonant with our peculiar investigation.
Turning toward fictional narratives with an ostensible relevance to our research, the works of Douglas Adams, particularly "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy," offer a fantastical yet strangely pertinent reflection on the idiosyncrasies of human choices. Additionally, the peculiar musings of Lewis Carroll in "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland" prompt us to challenge conventional wisdom and entertain the absurd, a fitting mindset for exploring the enigma of Killian's influence on electoral outcomes.
In the realm of internet culture, the viral phenomenon of "The Drake Equation" meme humorously intersects with our investigation, drawing attention to the playful side of pseudoscientific correlations and their potential influence on popular discourse. Furthermore, the timeless allure of the "This Is Fine" meme encapsulates the inexplicable nature of certain sociopolitical phenomena, providing a lighthearted yet thought-provoking context for our analysis.
As we wade into this labyrinth of scholarly literature and whimsical influences, the colorful tapestry of our investigation begins to take shape, blending the serious with the absurd in a whimsical dance of data and conjecture.
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 Popularity of the first name Killian and Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Kansas. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.
Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from US Social Security Administration and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse . You used data from 1982 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]]
"Killian It at the Ballot Box: An Examination of the Name's Influence on Libertarian Votes in Kansas"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper presents a quirky yet compelling analysis of the relationship between the popularity of the first name Killian and votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in the state of Kansas. Drawing from data sets provided by the US Social Security Administration, as well as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab and Harvard Dataverse, our research team endeavored to unravel this peculiar connection. To our surprise, we uncovered a strong correlation coefficient of 0.9550334, with a significance level of p < 0.01, spanning the years 1982 to 2020. The implications of our findings are as fascinating as they are improbable, shedding light on the inexplicable sway of nomenclature on political preferences. In our exploration of this uncharted territory, we offer humor, statistical rigor, and a unique perspective, highlighting the sometimes whimsical nature of human behavior and decision-making.
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The human experience is rife with curious enigmas, some more perplexing than others. How certain monikers can seemingly stealthily influence political leanings is just one of these mind-boggling conundrums. In this paper, we venture into the uncharted waters of name-association and its improbable correlation with political affiliations. Specifically, we delve into the magnetic allure of the first name "Killian" and its seemingly inexplicable connection to votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in the sunflower state of Kansas.
As if pulled straight from the annals of an absurdist comedy, our investigation uncovers a statistically robust relationship between the estimated number of individuals bearing the name Killian and the votes garnered by the Libertarian presidential candidate in Kansas. Our findings unveil a correlation coefficient of 0.9550334, with a significance level as compelling as a magician's sleight of hand, at p < 0.01, spanning the peculiarly specific epoch of 1982 to 2020.
But, before we plunge headfirst into this realm of whimsy and wonder, it is worth pondering the broader implications of our inquiry. Could it be that, in the labyrinthine corridors of the electorate's minds, lies a predilection for candidates based not on their policies or track record, but rather on the sonorous syllables of their given names? Are voters, consciously or subconsciously, swayed by the melodic ripples of certain nomenclature, transforming the political landscape into a surrealist's dream?
In the spirit of scholarly inquiry veiled in a cloak of levity, we embark on this odyssey of witticisms and empirical rigor, seeking to unravel the whimsical threads that bind the seemingly incongruous worlds of nomenclature and politics. Join us on this delightful yet intellectually rigorous escapade as we attempt to make sense of the nonsensical in the realm of voter behavior and the quirk of nomenclature.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
ChatGPT:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
To commence our unorthodox investigation, we summoned a motley crew of statisticians, linguists, and aficionados of the absurd to chart a course through the labyrinthine landscape of data analysis. Our first port of call was the US Social Security Administration, from which we procured the dataset detailing the annual occurrences of the name "Killian" from 1982 to 2020. Armed with this treasure trove of nomenclatural frequencies, we traversed the vast seas of the internet to discover the counts of votes cast for the Libertarian presidential candidate in the state of Kansas within the same temporal expanse. These electoral data, replete with the grandeur of ballot boxes and the color of each county, were sourced primarily from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab and the Harvard Dataverse.
Now, onto the procedural intricacies. The initial phase of our investigation involved conducting a rigorous quality assessment of the acquired datasets, ensuring that each datum was as reliable as an earnest politician's handshake. Once satisfied with the robustness of our data, we engaged in the daring act of data cleansing, where we meticulously expunged any erroneous or misleading entries. It was our fervent hope to present findings unsullied by the whims of randomness.
Subsequently, we invoked the incantations of statistical sorcery, summoning the powerful oracle known as the Pearson correlation coefficient, to measure the strength and direction of the relationship between the popularity of the name "Killian" and the votes accrued by the Libertarian presidential candidate in Kansas. Our intention was to unveil the quirk of this peculiar connection with a statistical clarity akin to a beacon in the fog of chance.
What followed was an arduous journey through the dark thickets of hypothesis testing, where we rigorously assessed the significance of our findings. Our compass pointed steadfastly to a significance level of p < 0.01, signifying a compelling departure from the realm of mere happenstance.
In grudging admiration of the scientific spirits of curiosity and skepticism, we attempted to mitigate potential lurking confounders by conducting a battery of robustness checks. These checks, carefully tailored to sniff out any muddlewits that might confound our noble endeavor, emboldened the validity of our findings, bolstering our confidence in the improbable correlation we had unmasked.
To complement our statistical sleuthing, we ventured into the cosmic expanse of thematic analysis, where we endeavored to decipher the underlying narrative behind the numerical intricacies. Our attempts to paint the portrait of the human condition through the whimsical connection between nomenclature and political preferences swelled with a fervor rivaling that of a Renaissance painter.
By the culmination of our Odyssey of the Absurd, the combination of statistical rigor and whimsical exploration granted us the unique vantage point to observe the surreptitious dance between seemingly incongruous realms of nomenclature and politics. Let us now, dear reader, venture forth to the conclusions pulsating with both curiosity and incredulity.
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 Popularity of the first name Killian and Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Kansas. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.
Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from US Social Security Administration and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse .
For the time period 1982 to 2020, you found a correlation 0.9550334, r-squared of 0.9120888, 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]]
"Killian It at the Ballot Box: An Examination of the Name's Influence on Libertarian Votes in Kansas"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper presents a quirky yet compelling analysis of the relationship between the popularity of the first name Killian and votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in the state of Kansas. Drawing from data sets provided by the US Social Security Administration, as well as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab and Harvard Dataverse, our research team endeavored to unravel this peculiar connection. To our surprise, we uncovered a strong correlation coefficient of 0.9550334, with a significance level of p < 0.01, spanning the years 1982 to 2020. The implications of our findings are as fascinating as they are improbable, shedding light on the inexplicable sway of nomenclature on political preferences. In our exploration of this uncharted territory, we offer humor, statistical rigor, and a unique perspective, highlighting the sometimes whimsical nature of human behavior and decision-making.
-------
And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
The human experience is rife with curious enigmas, some more perplexing than others. How certain monikers can seemingly stealthily influence political leanings is just one of these mind-boggling conundrums. In this paper, we venture into the uncharted waters of name-association and its improbable correlation with political affiliations. Specifically, we delve into the magnetic allure of the first name "Killian" and its seemingly inexplicable connection to votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in the sunflower state of Kansas.
As if pulled straight from the annals of an absurdist comedy, our investigation uncovers a statistically robust relationship between the estimated number of individuals bearing the name Killian and the votes garnered by the Libertarian presidential candidate in Kansas. Our findings unveil a correlation coefficient of 0.9550334, with a significance level as compelling as a magician's sleight of hand, at p < 0.01, spanning the peculiarly specific epoch of 1982 to 2020.
But, before we plunge headfirst into this realm of whimsy and wonder, it is worth pondering the broader implications of our inquiry. Could it be that, in the labyrinthine corridors of the electorate's minds, lies a predilection for candidates based not on their policies or track record, but rather on the sonorous syllables of their given names? Are voters, consciously or subconsciously, swayed by the melodic ripples of certain nomenclature, transforming the political landscape into a surrealist's dream?
In the spirit of scholarly inquiry veiled in a cloak of levity, we embark on this odyssey of witticisms and empirical rigor, seeking to unravel the whimsical threads that bind the seemingly incongruous worlds of nomenclature and politics. Join us on this delightful yet intellectually rigorous escapade as we attempt to make sense of the nonsensical in the realm of voter behavior and the quirk of nomenclature.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[RESULTS]]
ChatGPT:
[[RESULTS]]
A striking correlation emerged from the depths of our data analysis, revealing a coefficient of 0.9550334 between the popularity of the first name "Killian" and the votes cast for the Libertarian presidential candidate in Kansas. The strength of this association is akin to the gravitational pull between celestial bodies, leaving us in awe of the inexplicable link between nomenclature and political preferences.
Our findings, encapsulated in Figure 1, depict a scatterplot that visually encapsulates this remarkable relationship. The plotted points resemble a constellation of votes, traversing a cosmic landscape that is inexplicably intertwined with the ethereal essence of the name "Killian." One could almost imagine the data points whispering, "Vote for me, and I will complement your unique moniker with an equally distinctive political inclination."
The r-squared value of 0.9120888 further accentuates the robustness of this correlation, signifying that over 91% of the variance in Libertarian votes can be explained by the prevalence of the name "Killian." This statistical feat is as impressive as a magician correctly guessing the chosen card in a deck, leaving us marveling at the confounding enigma of human behavior.
The significance level of p < 0.01 underscores the credibility of our findings, asserting that the likelihood of this correlation occurring by mere chance is less than that of finding a four-leaf clover in a Kansas cornfield. This reassures us that our results are not mere happenstance, but rather a manifestation of a peculiar alignment between nomenclature and political proclivities.
In summary, our research unravels a profound and eccentric relationship between the popularity of the first name "Killian" and votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in Kansas. This unexpected revelation challenges conventional wisdom, reminding us that the whimsical dance of human behavior is as unpredictable as a roguish fox in a political henhouse.
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 Popularity of the first name Killian and Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Kansas. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.
Limit your response to 500 tokens.
Here are the title, abstract, literature review, and results sections. Please harken back to 1-2 of the goofy items in the literature review, but pretend to take them completely seriously. Discuss how your results supported the prior research.
Do not write a conclusion. I will add a conclusion after this.
[[TITLE]]
"Killian It at the Ballot Box: An Examination of the Name's Influence on Libertarian Votes in Kansas"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper presents a quirky yet compelling analysis of the relationship between the popularity of the first name Killian and votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in the state of Kansas. Drawing from data sets provided by the US Social Security Administration, as well as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab and Harvard Dataverse, our research team endeavored to unravel this peculiar connection. To our surprise, we uncovered a strong correlation coefficient of 0.9550334, with a significance level of p < 0.01, spanning the years 1982 to 2020. The implications of our findings are as fascinating as they are improbable, shedding light on the inexplicable sway of nomenclature on political preferences. In our exploration of this uncharted territory, we offer humor, statistical rigor, and a unique perspective, highlighting the sometimes whimsical nature of human behavior and decision-making.
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
Previous research on the relationship between names and political affiliations has primarily focused on traditional, widely-used monikers. Smith and Doe (2018) delved into the intersection of first names and political leanings, examining the classic names John and Mary in their seminal work "The Political Pseudoscience of Names." Their analysis revealed intriguing correlations but failed to explore the potential impact of more eccentric names on electoral behavior. Similarly, Jones (2015) explored the influence of surnames on political donations in "The Surname Effect: A Study of Political Contributions," providing valuable insights into the impact of familial lineage on political engagement.
As we dig into the literature, we transition from the serious to the whimsical, delving into unexpected avenues of inquiry. "Freakonomics" by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner (2005) offers a tantalizing exploration of seemingly unrelated factors influencing human behavior, preparing our minds to embrace the offbeat connection between a name and political preferences. Following this trail of unconventional thinking, "The Tipping Point" by Malcolm Gladwell (2000) propels our understanding of the quirky and unpredictable nature of social phenomena, undoubtedly resonant with our peculiar investigation.
Turning toward fictional narratives with an ostensible relevance to our research, the works of Douglas Adams, particularly "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy," offer a fantastical yet strangely pertinent reflection on the idiosyncrasies of human choices. Additionally, the peculiar musings of Lewis Carroll in "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland" prompt us to challenge conventional wisdom and entertain the absurd, a fitting mindset for exploring the enigma of Killian's influence on electoral outcomes.
In the realm of internet culture, the viral phenomenon of "The Drake Equation" meme humorously intersects with our investigation, drawing attention to the playful side of pseudoscientific correlations and their potential influence on popular discourse. Furthermore, the timeless allure of the "This Is Fine" meme encapsulates the inexplicable nature of certain sociopolitical phenomena, providing a lighthearted yet thought-provoking context for our analysis.
As we wade into this labyrinth of scholarly literature and whimsical influences, the colorful tapestry of our investigation begins to take shape, blending the serious with the absurd in a whimsical dance of data and conjecture.
[[RESULTS]]
A striking correlation emerged from the depths of our data analysis, revealing a coefficient of 0.9550334 between the popularity of the first name "Killian" and the votes cast for the Libertarian presidential candidate in Kansas. The strength of this association is akin to the gravitational pull between celestial bodies, leaving us in awe of the inexplicable link between nomenclature and political preferences.
Our findings, encapsulated in Figure 1, depict a scatterplot that visually encapsulates this remarkable relationship. The plotted points resemble a constellation of votes, traversing a cosmic landscape that is inexplicably intertwined with the ethereal essence of the name "Killian." One could almost imagine the data points whispering, "Vote for me, and I will complement your unique moniker with an equally distinctive political inclination."
The r-squared value of 0.9120888 further accentuates the robustness of this correlation, signifying that over 91% of the variance in Libertarian votes can be explained by the prevalence of the name "Killian." This statistical feat is as impressive as a magician correctly guessing the chosen card in a deck, leaving us marveling at the confounding enigma of human behavior.
The significance level of p < 0.01 underscores the credibility of our findings, asserting that the likelihood of this correlation occurring by mere chance is less than that of finding a four-leaf clover in a Kansas cornfield. This reassures us that our results are not mere happenstance, but rather a manifestation of a peculiar alignment between nomenclature and political proclivities.
In summary, our research unravels a profound and eccentric relationship between the popularity of the first name "Killian" and votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in Kansas. This unexpected revelation challenges conventional wisdom, reminding us that the whimsical dance of human behavior is as unpredictable as a roguish fox in a political henhouse.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[DISCUSSION]]
ChatGPT:
[[DISCUSSION]]
Our findings have unearthed a correlation so strong, it could forge an alliance between a Kansas sunflower and a gust of wind. The exceptional coefficient of 0.9550334 evokes a sense of wonder comparable to witnessing a herd of independent-minded cats herded by a Libertarian cowboy through the prairies of Kansas.
Drawing on the literature, we found ourselves enthralled by the unexpected yet strangely plausible insights of previous research. Smith and Doe's work on the political pseudoscience of names set the stage for our investigation, much like unlocking a treasure chest filled with peculiar patterns of human behavior. Likewise, Jones' exploration of the surname effect provided a tantalizing glimpse into the familial tapestry of political engagement, resonating closely with the idiosyncratic relationship between a name and electoral choices.
Our results not only aligned with these prior studies but extended them into uncharted territory, akin to setting sail from the comfortable shores of tradition into the wild waters of whimsy. The robust statistical support we discovered was like finding a treasure map of electoral fascination in the unlikeliest of places -- the alphabet.
As we reflect on the jovial undercurrents that guided our inquiry, we are reminded of the cheeky musings of Steven D. Levitt, Stephen J. Dubner, and the irreverent charm of Douglas Adams - all of which led us to delight in the peculiar dance of data and conjecture.
The whimsy of our results prompts us to entertain the prospect of "Killian" becoming synonymous with an untamed spirit of individuality, much like a lone rogue cowboy traversing the electoral plains of Kansas, drawing voters with an allure as captivating as a siren's call. In this light, our research serves as a delightful romp through the cornfields of statistical analysis, a testament to the unexpected beguilement of human behavior.
In conclusion, our work has unveiled a correlation as enigmatic as a crop circle appearing overnight in the Kansas prairie. The quest to unravel the allure of "Killian" and its influence on political preferences has left us with one inescapable truth - when it comes to electoral whimsy, there are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in conventional political philosophy.
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 Popularity of the first name Killian and Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Kansas. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.
Limit your response to 300 tokens. At the very end, assert that no more research is needed in this area.
Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
"Killian It at the Ballot Box: An Examination of the Name's Influence on Libertarian Votes in Kansas"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper presents a quirky yet compelling analysis of the relationship between the popularity of the first name Killian and votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in the state of Kansas. Drawing from data sets provided by the US Social Security Administration, as well as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab and Harvard Dataverse, our research team endeavored to unravel this peculiar connection. To our surprise, we uncovered a strong correlation coefficient of 0.9550334, with a significance level of p < 0.01, spanning the years 1982 to 2020. The implications of our findings are as fascinating as they are improbable, shedding light on the inexplicable sway of nomenclature on political preferences. In our exploration of this uncharted territory, we offer humor, statistical rigor, and a unique perspective, highlighting the sometimes whimsical nature of human behavior and decision-making.
[[INTRDUCTION]]
The human experience is rife with curious enigmas, some more perplexing than others. How certain monikers can seemingly stealthily influence political leanings is just one of these mind-boggling conundrums. In this paper, we venture into the uncharted waters of name-association and its improbable correlation with political affiliations. Specifically, we delve into the magnetic allure of the first name "Killian" and its seemingly inexplicable connection to votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in the sunflower state of Kansas.
As if pulled straight from the annals of an absurdist comedy, our investigation uncovers a statistically robust relationship between the estimated number of individuals bearing the name Killian and the votes garnered by the Libertarian presidential candidate in Kansas. Our findings unveil a correlation coefficient of 0.9550334, with a significance level as compelling as a magician's sleight of hand, at p < 0.01, spanning the peculiarly specific epoch of 1982 to 2020.
But, before we plunge headfirst into this realm of whimsy and wonder, it is worth pondering the broader implications of our inquiry. Could it be that, in the labyrinthine corridors of the electorate's minds, lies a predilection for candidates based not on their policies or track record, but rather on the sonorous syllables of their given names? Are voters, consciously or subconsciously, swayed by the melodic ripples of certain nomenclature, transforming the political landscape into a surrealist's dream?
In the spirit of scholarly inquiry veiled in a cloak of levity, we embark on this odyssey of witticisms and empirical rigor, seeking to unravel the whimsical threads that bind the seemingly incongruous worlds of nomenclature and politics. Join us on this delightful yet intellectually rigorous escapade as we attempt to make sense of the nonsensical in the realm of voter behavior and the quirk of nomenclature.
[[RESULTS]]
A striking correlation emerged from the depths of our data analysis, revealing a coefficient of 0.9550334 between the popularity of the first name "Killian" and the votes cast for the Libertarian presidential candidate in Kansas. The strength of this association is akin to the gravitational pull between celestial bodies, leaving us in awe of the inexplicable link between nomenclature and political preferences.
Our findings, encapsulated in Figure 1, depict a scatterplot that visually encapsulates this remarkable relationship. The plotted points resemble a constellation of votes, traversing a cosmic landscape that is inexplicably intertwined with the ethereal essence of the name "Killian." One could almost imagine the data points whispering, "Vote for me, and I will complement your unique moniker with an equally distinctive political inclination."
The r-squared value of 0.9120888 further accentuates the robustness of this correlation, signifying that over 91% of the variance in Libertarian votes can be explained by the prevalence of the name "Killian." This statistical feat is as impressive as a magician correctly guessing the chosen card in a deck, leaving us marveling at the confounding enigma of human behavior.
The significance level of p < 0.01 underscores the credibility of our findings, asserting that the likelihood of this correlation occurring by mere chance is less than that of finding a four-leaf clover in a Kansas cornfield. This reassures us that our results are not mere happenstance, but rather a manifestation of a peculiar alignment between nomenclature and political proclivities.
In summary, our research unravels a profound and eccentric relationship between the popularity of the first name "Killian" and votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in Kansas. This unexpected revelation challenges conventional wisdom, reminding us that the whimsical dance of human behavior is as unpredictable as a roguish fox in a political henhouse.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[CONCLUSION]]
ChatGPT:
[[CONCLUSION]]
In conclusion, our study has shed light on the inexplicable relationship between the first name "Killian" and votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in Kansas. Our findings, though as bewildering as a dancing platypus, have underscored the undeniable sway of nomenclature on political inclinations. The statistically robust correlation coefficient of 0.9550334 and the significance level of p < 0.01 have led us to realize that the resonance of a name's cadence may hold more influence than anticipated, akin to a mesmerizing symphony guiding voters' choices.
As we ponder the implications of our research, we can't help but be reminded of the whimsical unpredictabilities of human behavior, with voters potentially swayed by the lyrical lullaby of "Killian" amidst the cacophony of political discourse. However, while our findings are as intriguing as a platypus in a top hat, we recognize that further research in this area may encounter diminishing returns - like finding a needle in a haystack, or a Libertarian voter in a pumpkin patch.
Therefore, we assert that no further investigation is needed in this domain. As our paper charmingly illustrates, the realm of nomenclature and its influence on political predilections may forever remain a captivating and confounding quirk of human behavior, best left to the whimsy of the unknowable.
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 Killian It at the Ballot Box: An Examination of the Name's Influence on Libertarian Votes in Kansas. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.
ChatGPT:
The Journal of Quirky Political Psychology
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of nonprofit research organizations and associations. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding nonprofit, academic, or scientific association or organization that would sponsor research that resulted in a paper entited Killian It at the Ballot Box: An Examination of the Name's Influence on Libertarian Votes in Kansas. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.
ChatGPT:
The Luminescent Institute for Social and Political Research
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 Killian It at the Ballot Box: An Examination of the Name's Influence on Libertarian Votes in Kansas with an abstract of This paper presents a quirky yet compelling analysis of the relationship between the popularity of the first name Killian and votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in the state of Kansas. Drawing from data sets provided by the US Social Security Administration, as well as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab and Harvard Dataverse, our research team endeavored to unravel this peculiar connection. To our surprise, we uncovered a strong correlation coefficient of 0.9550334, with a significance level of p < 0.01, spanning the years 1982 to 2020. The implications of our findings are as fascinating as they are improbable, shedding light on the inexplicable sway of nomenclature on political preferences. In our exploration of this uncharted territory, we offer humor, statistical rigor, and a unique perspective, highlighting the sometimes whimsical nature of human behavior and decision-making.
ChatGPT:
Killian name influence, Libertarian votes Kansas, political preferences, US Social Security Administration data, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, name popularity and voting, correlation coefficient, significance level, political behavior, decision making
*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 KillianDetailed data title: Babies of all sexes born in the US named Killian
Source: US Social Security Administration
See what else correlates with Popularity of the first name Killian
Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Kansas
Detailed data title: Percentage of all votes cast for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Kansas
Source: MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse
See what else correlates with Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Kansas
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 = 0.9120888 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 91.2% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Kansas) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Popularity of the first name Killian) over the 9 years from 1982 through 2020.
p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 6.07E-5. 0.0000607450145786785300000000
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 0.96 in 0.00607% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 16,462 random variables Which I absolutely did.
with the same 8 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 8 because we have two variables measured over a period of 9 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.
[ 0.8, 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.
1984 | 1992 | 1996 | 2000 | 2004 | 2008 | 2012 | 2016 | 2020 | |
Popularity of the first name Killian (Babies born) | 7 | 93 | 161 | 158 | 166 | 290 | 280 | 1400 | 911 |
Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Kansas (Percentage of votes) | 0.325737 | 0.372785 | 0.424183 | 0.422023 | 0.337864 | 0.542613 | 1.76349 | 4.67797 | 2.22793 |
Why this works
- Data dredging: I have 25,237 variables in my database. I compare all these variables against each other to find ones that randomly match up. That's 636,906,169 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. - 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([7,93,161,158,166,290,280,1400,911,])
array_2 = np.array([0.325737,0.372785,0.424183,0.422023,0.337864,0.542613,1.76349,4.67797,2.22793,])
array_1_name = "Popularity of the first name Killian"
array_2_name = "Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Kansas"
# 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 Killian
- Line chart for only Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Kansas
- AI-generated correlation image
- The spurious research paper: Killian It at the Ballot Box: An Examination of the Name's Influence on Libertarian Votes in Kansas
Your rating is much appreciated!
Correlation ID: 5509 · Black Variable ID: 3936 · Red Variable ID: 26098