Spurious correlation #5,515 · View random
A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Iowa and the second variable is Liquefied petroleum gas used in Czechia. The chart goes from 1993 to 2020, and the two variables track closely in value over that time.

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Iowa and the second variable is Liquefied petroleum gas used in Czechia. The chart goes from 1993 to 2020, and the two variables track closely in value over that time.

Download png, svg

AI explanation

It's simple really, as the support for the Republican candidate heated up in Iowa, it created a gas-tly domino effect. This surge in political enthusiasm somehow sparked a parallel interest in LPG across the globe, particularly in Czechia. It seems that when it comes to energy, even political fervor can fuel a country's LPG usage. Who knew that the race for the White House could have such a 'propane-derful' impact internationally? It's a real gas!

^{Show image generation prompt} Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image inspired by a woodblock painting style. In the scene, a large group of people in Iowa are fervently casting votes for the Republican Presidential candidate, creating an atmosphere charged with political energy. This excitement triggers a ripple effect, visually conveyed as a surge of energy emanating from the voting area. This energy then extends globally to Czechia, where people are shown enthusiastically choosing LPG as a popular energy choice. The image captures the unique and impactful connection between the shared fervor for politics and the surge of interest in LPG, creating a visually striking narrative that emphasizes the interplay of diverse influences. 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: Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Iowa and Liquefied petroleum gas used in Czechia. 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: High-tech Cyber folk Woodblock painting Charcoal Concept art
ChatGPT: Woodblock painting

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 Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Iowa and Liquefied petroleum gas used in Czechia, in the following situation: It's simple really, as the support for the Republican candidate heated up in Iowa, it created a gas-tly domino effect. This surge in political enthusiasm somehow sparked a parallel interest in LPG across the globe, particularly in Czechia. It seems that when it comes to energy, even political fervor can fuel a country's LPG usage. Who knew that the race for the White House could have such a 'propane-derful' impact internationally? It's a real gas!. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In Iowa, a large group of people are seen casting votes for the Republican Presidential candidate, creating a buzz of political fervor. As the excitement builds, it triggers a ripple effect that seems to ignite a surge of interest in Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) in Czechia. The scene shows people in Czechia choosing LPG as a popular energy choice, inspired somehow by the political energy across the globe. The shared enthusiasm for both politics and energy creates a unique and impactful connection between the two seemingly unrelated variables.

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: [ Woodblock painting ] and depicting this scene: In Iowa, a large group of people are seen casting votes for the Republican Presidential candidate, creating a buzz of political fervor. As the excitement builds, it triggers a ripple effect that seems to ignite a surge of interest in Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) in Czechia. The scene shows people in Czechia choosing LPG as a popular energy choice, inspired somehow by the political energy across the globe. The shared enthusiasm for both politics and energy creates a unique and impactful connection between the two seemingly unrelated variables. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image inspired by a woodblock painting style. In the scene, a large group of people in Iowa are fervently casting votes for the Republican Presidential candidate, creating an atmosphere charged with political energy. This excitement triggers a ripple effect, visually conveyed as a surge of energy emanating from the voting area. This energy then extends globally to Czechia, where people are shown enthusiastically choosing LPG as a popular energy choice. The image captures the unique and impactful connection between the shared fervor for politics and the surge of interest in LPG, creating a visually striking narrative that emphasizes the interplay of diverse influences.

*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.
^{Show prompt for explanation} Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 (fine-tuned)
System prompt: You provide humorous responses in the form of plausible sounding explanations for correlations. You assume the correlation is causative for the purpose of the explanation even if it is ridiculous. You do not chat with the user, you only reply with the causal connection explanation and nothing else.
User prompt: Please make up a funny explanation for how an increase in Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Iowa caused Liquefied petroleum gas used in Czechia to increase. Include one good pun.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)

Voting on the Rocks: A Flaming Correlation Between Republican Presidential Votes in Iowa and Liquefied Petroleum Gas Consumption in Czechia

Journal of Political Propane Analysis

Jan 2024

Reminder: This paper is AI-generated. Not real!

^{Show prompt used to generate this paper} Quick note: This sequence is long and repetitive. That's how the prompt engineering works for this one. I manage the output in Python to format it into this PDF.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.You 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 Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Iowa and Liquefied petroleum gas used in Czechia. 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 some movies that you watched that are tangentially related to the topic.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Voting on the Rocks: A Flaming Correlation Between Republican Presidential Votes in Iowa and Liquefied Petroleum Gas Consumption in Czechia

[[ABSTRACT]]
The mysterious and unexpected relationship between political preferences in the heartland of the United States and the usage of liquefied petroleum gas half a world away has long puzzled researchers. In this study, we dive into the peculiar correlation between votes for the Republican presidential candidate in Iowa and the consumption of LPG in Czechia. Utilizing data from reputable sources such as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, our research team uncovered a remarkably robust correlation coefficient of 0.9464168 with a p-value less than 0.01 for the years 1993 to 2020.

We navigated through the data with bated breath, intrigued by the uncanny alignment of these seemingly disparate variables. We did not merely scratch the surface; rather, we unearthed a correlation so strong that it could power a propane grill for a lifetime. Our findings not only ignite curiosity but also spark the question of whether there is a fiery connection between American political sentiments and Czech energy choices. Whether it's the "red state" preference or a shared love for the warmth of gas heat, this correlation stands out like a bonfire in the research landscape. Our study sheds light on this unexpected relationship and fuels further inquiry into the interconnected nature of global phenomena.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
As we embark on this scintillating journey into the enigmatic realm of statistical correlations, we find ourselves in the delightful conundrum of examining the improbable connection between the voting patterns of Iowans and the utilization of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) in Czechia. The bewitching dance of data has led us to uncover a relationship so captivating that it could easily be the plot of a whimsical romantic comedy – "My Big Fat Correlation: Propane in Prague."
In the hallowed halls of academia, where dry prose often reigns supreme, we dare to venture into the realm of quirky correlations and unexpected connections. Indeed, our endeavor to explore the nexus between political leanings in the American heartland and the consumption of a flammable gas in Central Europe transcends the mundane conventions of typical research inquiries. It's a tale as old as time – think Romeo and Juliet, except instead of feuding families, we have feuding data sets, and instead of star-crossed lovers, we have statistically significant relationships.
As we delve into the crux of this perplexing association, we don our metaphorical Sherlock Holmes hats, ready to unleash the inferno of curiosity that blazes within our research souls. With statistical tools as our trusty sidekicks, we embark on a quest to unravel the mystery that binds these seemingly incongruous variables together – a mystery that has confounded even the most seasoned of empirical sleuths.
Our adventure begins with a fervent desire to unearth the hidden truths lurking beneath the surface of numbers and charts. We refuse to be confined by the stuffy stereotypes of academia; instead, we choose to embrace the joy of discovery with the exuberance of a lab coat-clad Indiana Jones, brandishing a graphing calculator as our chosen artifact.
So, dear reader, fasten your seatbelts and prepare for a rollercoaster ride through the realms of data analysis, political intrigue, and propane-fueled paradoxes. Our findings are sure to light a fire of fascination within your academic soul and leave you longing for more insights into the whimsical world of statistical exploration. After all, who knew that the juxtaposition of political allegiances and gas usage could spark such scholarly amusement? Welcome to the wonderfully wacky world of correlation research – where the unexpected is always on the menu!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

In their seminal work, Smith and Doe (2010) examined the electoral behaviors of Midwestern voters and unearthed intriguing patterns that seem to mirror the ebb and flow of Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) consumption in Central Europe. Their findings cast a shadow of curiosity over the interplay between seemingly unrelated phenomena, leaving the scholarly community both perplexed and amused. Moreover, Jones et al. (2015) delved into the complexities of energy consumption trends in Eastern Europe, offering glimpses of potential correlations with political leanings in the United States. These reputable studies lay the groundwork for our investigation into the mysterious intercontinental dance of political affinities and flammable hydrocarbons.

As we venture deeper into the labyrinth of literature, we encounter intriguing titles such as "The Gas Quandary: A Political Propane Saga" by Lorem Ipsum (2018), which offers a fictional yet tantalizing exploration of the intertwining fates of American voting proclivities and European gas usage. This quirky blend of political drama and energy eccentricities beckons us into a realm where statistical analysis meets the whimsy of a campfire story. In a similar vein, "The LPG Conundrum" by Lorem Ipsum (2016) presents a whimsical narrative of improbable connections, inviting readers to ponder the enigmatic links between political ideologies and fuel preferences.

Venturing beyond the scholarly realm, we draw inspiration from a diverse array of fiction and cinema. From the pages of Haruki Murakami's "Kafka on the Shore" to the silver screen escapades of "The Propane Puzzle: A Statistical Odyssey," the allure of improbable correlations and unexpected pairings permeates the cultural tapestry of storytelling. The quirky, the bizarre, and the unlikely become the protagonists of our intellectual journey, guiding us towards the revelation of captivating associations that defy conventional logic.

In the spirit of lighthearted introspection, our research team found themselves captivated by a series of cinematic adventures that mirrored the uncanny nature of our scholarly pursuit. Films such as "Back to the Futures: Electoral Edition," "Gaslighting in Prague," and "The Propane Paradox" provided humorous yet thought-provoking analogies to our exploration of statistical mysteries and unlikely connections. As we immersed ourselves in the celluloid amalgamation of political intrigue and flammable substances, we couldn't help but chuckle at the serendipitous parallels between reels of fiction and the realities of our research landscape.

In the grand tapestry of scholarly inquiry, the intersection of statistical analysis and entertainment blurs the boundaries between the serious and the whimsical, inviting us to embrace the delightful absurdity that permeates the world of intellectual exploration. With each turn of the page or frame of the screen, we find ourselves drawn closer to the heart of statistical amusement and academic curiosity, guided by the comedic promptings of unexpected correlations and the scholarly call of quirky inquiries.

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

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Iowa and Liquefied petroleum gas used in Czechia. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and Energy Information Administration . You used data from 1993 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]]
Voting on the Rocks: A Flaming Correlation Between Republican Presidential Votes in Iowa and Liquefied Petroleum Gas Consumption in Czechia

[[ABSTRACT]]
The mysterious and unexpected relationship between political preferences in the heartland of the United States and the usage of liquefied petroleum gas half a world away has long puzzled researchers. In this study, we dive into the peculiar correlation between votes for the Republican presidential candidate in Iowa and the consumption of LPG in Czechia. Utilizing data from reputable sources such as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, our research team uncovered a remarkably robust correlation coefficient of 0.9464168 with a p-value less than 0.01 for the years 1993 to 2020.

We navigated through the data with bated breath, intrigued by the uncanny alignment of these seemingly disparate variables. We did not merely scratch the surface; rather, we unearthed a correlation so strong that it could power a propane grill for a lifetime. Our findings not only ignite curiosity but also spark the question of whether there is a fiery connection between American political sentiments and Czech energy choices. Whether it's the "red state" preference or a shared love for the warmth of gas heat, this correlation stands out like a bonfire in the research landscape. Our study sheds light on this unexpected relationship and fuels further inquiry into the interconnected nature of global phenomena.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
As we embark on this scintillating journey into the enigmatic realm of statistical correlations, we find ourselves in the delightful conundrum of examining the improbable connection between the voting patterns of Iowans and the utilization of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) in Czechia. The bewitching dance of data has led us to uncover a relationship so captivating that it could easily be the plot of a whimsical romantic comedy – "My Big Fat Correlation: Propane in Prague."
In the hallowed halls of academia, where dry prose often reigns supreme, we dare to venture into the realm of quirky correlations and unexpected connections. Indeed, our endeavor to explore the nexus between political leanings in the American heartland and the consumption of a flammable gas in Central Europe transcends the mundane conventions of typical research inquiries. It's a tale as old as time – think Romeo and Juliet, except instead of feuding families, we have feuding data sets, and instead of star-crossed lovers, we have statistically significant relationships.
As we delve into the crux of this perplexing association, we don our metaphorical Sherlock Holmes hats, ready to unleash the inferno of curiosity that blazes within our research souls. With statistical tools as our trusty sidekicks, we embark on a quest to unravel the mystery that binds these seemingly incongruous variables together – a mystery that has confounded even the most seasoned of empirical sleuths.
Our adventure begins with a fervent desire to unearth the hidden truths lurking beneath the surface of numbers and charts. We refuse to be confined by the stuffy stereotypes of academia; instead, we choose to embrace the joy of discovery with the exuberance of a lab coat-clad Indiana Jones, brandishing a graphing calculator as our chosen artifact.
So, dear reader, fasten your seatbelts and prepare for a rollercoaster ride through the realms of data analysis, political intrigue, and propane-fueled paradoxes. Our findings are sure to light a fire of fascination within your academic soul and leave you longing for more insights into the whimsical world of statistical exploration. After all, who knew that the juxtaposition of political allegiances and gas usage could spark such scholarly amusement? Welcome to the wonderfully wacky world of correlation research – where the unexpected is always on the menu!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To unravel the enthralling mystery of the seemingly improbable connection between Republican presidential votes in Iowa and the consumption of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) in Czechia, our research team employed a concoction of statistical wizardry, data sleuthing, and a dash of good old-fashioned curiosity. Armed with spreadsheets, caffeine, and an insatiable hunger for uncovering statistical oddities, we embarked on a quest that would make even the most intrepid of data scientists raise an eyebrow in bemused disbelief.

Data Collection:

Our journey into the tantalizing realm of correlation analysis commenced with the meticulous curation of datasets hailing from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration. We combed through electoral records from Iowa, scrutinized LPG consumption trends in Czechia, and meticulously assembled a treasure trove of empirical evidence that would make even the most seasoned archivist envious. As far as internet scavenger hunts go, this one was akin to searching for statistical needles in the digital haystack.

Variables and Measures:

With our data in tow, we set out to wrangle the variables that would form the backbone of our investigation. Votes for the Republican presidential candidate in Iowa served as our spirited protagonist, intertwining with the fervor and fervency of a political thriller, while LPG consumption in Czechia played the role of the enigmatic co-star, adding a touch of continental intrigue to our statistical narrative. We meticulously combed through the intricacies of these variables, scrutinizing their nuances with the precision of a virtuoso painter carefully layering brushstrokes on a canvas.

Statistical Analysis:

Armed with a bevy of statistical tools and a fervent zeal for unraveling hidden relationships, we subjected our data to a series of analyses that would make even the most stoic of statisticians crack a wry smile. From the frolicsome frolics of scatter plots to the melodious melodies of regression analysis, we spared no statistical technique in our quest to uncover the mesmerizing correlation between these seemingly incongruous variables. Our analysis danced through the realms of covariance, correlation coefficients, and p-values, eliciting gasps of statistical astonishment from even the most jaded of empirical observers.

Time Period:

Our odyssey through the annals of data was not confined to a fleeting moment in time; rather, it spanned the years 1993 to 2020, capturing the ebb and flow of electoral fervor in Iowa and the ebullient fluctuations of LPG consumption in Czechia. This expansive temporal scope allowed us to capture the evolution of these variables with the same captivating fervor as a biologist observing the metamorphosis of a butterfly.

Limitations and Caveats:

As with any intrepid journey into the statistical wilderness, our expedition was not without its fair share of limitations and caveats. While our findings exude a robustness that would make even the sturdiest of oak trees envious, we acknowledge the presence of lurking confounding variables and unexplored intricacies that beg for the light of empirical scrutiny. However, much like the valiant explorers of yore, we press forward, armed with the knowledge that the quest for truth is a never-ending voyage, filled with surprises at every turn.

In conclusion, our methodological approach fused the precision of empirical analysis with the whimsy of serendipitous discovery, creating a symphony of statistical exploration that transcends the mundane and embraces the delights of scholarly revelry. Our methodological concoction, much like a well-timed punchline, seamlessly wove together the threads of data, analysis, and unbridled curiosity, leaving us with a correlation that burns bright amidst the scholarly firmament.

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

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Iowa and Liquefied petroleum gas used in Czechia. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Limit your response to 500 tokens.

Here are the title, abstract, literature review, and results sections. Please harken back to 1-2 of the goofy items in the literature review, but pretend to take them completely seriously. Discuss how your results supported the prior research.

Do not write a conclusion. I will add a conclusion after this.

[[TITLE]]
Voting on the Rocks: A Flaming Correlation Between Republican Presidential Votes in Iowa and Liquefied Petroleum Gas Consumption in Czechia

[[ABSTRACT]]
The mysterious and unexpected relationship between political preferences in the heartland of the United States and the usage of liquefied petroleum gas half a world away has long puzzled researchers. In this study, we dive into the peculiar correlation between votes for the Republican presidential candidate in Iowa and the consumption of LPG in Czechia. Utilizing data from reputable sources such as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, our research team uncovered a remarkably robust correlation coefficient of 0.9464168 with a p-value less than 0.01 for the years 1993 to 2020.

We navigated through the data with bated breath, intrigued by the uncanny alignment of these seemingly disparate variables. We did not merely scratch the surface; rather, we unearthed a correlation so strong that it could power a propane grill for a lifetime. Our findings not only ignite curiosity but also spark the question of whether there is a fiery connection between American political sentiments and Czech energy choices. Whether it's the "red state" preference or a shared love for the warmth of gas heat, this correlation stands out like a bonfire in the research landscape. Our study sheds light on this unexpected relationship and fuels further inquiry into the interconnected nature of global phenomena.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
In their seminal work, Smith and Doe (2010) examined the electoral behaviors of Midwestern voters and unearthed intriguing patterns that seem to mirror the ebb and flow of Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) consumption in Central Europe. Their findings cast a shadow of curiosity over the interplay between seemingly unrelated phenomena, leaving the scholarly community both perplexed and amused. Moreover, Jones et al. (2015) delved into the complexities of energy consumption trends in Eastern Europe, offering glimpses of potential correlations with political leanings in the United States. These reputable studies lay the groundwork for our investigation into the mysterious intercontinental dance of political affinities and flammable hydrocarbons.
As we venture deeper into the labyrinth of literature, we encounter intriguing titles such as "The Gas Quandary: A Political Propane Saga" by Lorem Ipsum (2018), which offers a fictional yet tantalizing exploration of the intertwining fates of American voting proclivities and European gas usage. This quirky blend of political drama and energy eccentricities beckons us into a realm where statistical analysis meets the whimsy of a campfire story. In a similar vein, "The LPG Conundrum" by Lorem Ipsum (2016) presents a whimsical narrative of improbable connections, inviting readers to ponder the enigmatic links between political ideologies and fuel preferences.
Venturing beyond the scholarly realm, we draw inspiration from a diverse array of fiction and cinema. From the pages of Haruki Murakami's "Kafka on the Shore" to the silver screen escapades of "The Propane Puzzle: A Statistical Odyssey," the allure of improbable correlations and unexpected pairings permeates the cultural tapestry of storytelling. The quirky, the bizarre, and the unlikely become the protagonists of our intellectual journey, guiding us towards the revelation of captivating associations that defy conventional logic.
In the spirit of lighthearted introspection, our research team found themselves captivated by a series of cinematic adventures that mirrored the uncanny nature of our scholarly pursuit. Films such as "Back to the Futures: Electoral Edition," "Gaslighting in Prague," and "The Propane Paradox" provided humorous yet thought-provoking analogies to our exploration of statistical mysteries and unlikely connections. As we immersed ourselves in the celluloid amalgamation of political intrigue and flammable substances, we couldn't help but chuckle at the serendipitous parallels between reels of fiction and the realities of our research landscape.
In the grand tapestry of scholarly inquiry, the intersection of statistical analysis and entertainment blurs the boundaries between the serious and the whimsical, inviting us to embrace the delightful absurdity that permeates the world of intellectual exploration. With each turn of the page or frame of the screen, we find ourselves drawn closer to the heart of statistical amusement and academic curiosity, guided by the comedic promptings of unexpected correlations and the scholarly call of quirky inquiries.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our analysis revealed a striking correlation between the votes for the Republican presidential candidate in Iowa and the consumption of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) in Czechia from 1993 to 2020. Our statistical analysis unveiled a correlation coefficient of 0.9464168, which is almost as close as two molecules in a covalent bond. This finding suggests a very strong positive linear relationship between these two seemingly unrelated variables. It's as if these data points were holding hands and skipping through a field of statistical significance!
Furthermore, the r-squared value of 0.8957048 indicates that approximately 89.57% of the variability in LPG consumption in Czechia can be explained by the votes for the Republican presidential candidate in Iowa. In other words, we can say with confidence that there's more than just hot air behind this association – it's a veritable statistical flame that refuses to be extinguished.
The p-value of less than 0.01 provides convincing evidence against the null hypothesis and supports the alternative hypothesis that there is indeed a significant relationship between these variables. It's safe to say that the likelihood of this correlation occurring by random chance is about as high as finding a needle in a statistically significant haystack!
The scatterplot (Fig. 1) visually represents this fiery correlation, with the data points forming a clear upward trend that's as unmistakable as a flaming torch in the dark. As we observed the clustering of points on the graph, we couldn't help but marvel at how these variables seem to be dancing a statistical salsa, moving in perfect harmony across the years.
In conclusion, our findings illuminate a connection between the political preferences of Iowans and the consumption of LPG in Czechia that is as captivating as a chemistry experiment gone awry. This unexpected relationship begs the question: is there a combustible bond between American voting patterns and Czech energy usage, or is this merely a statistical bonfire of the vanities? Our results beckon further exploration into the whimsical world of unlikely correlations, proving that in the realm of research, truth is often stranger than fiction.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Our investigation into the correlation between votes for the Republican presidential candidate in Iowa and liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) consumption in Czechia has sparked a heated discussion in the research community. The surprising strength of the correlation coefficient, reminiscent of a steadfast flame in the face of statistical uncertainty, supports and expands upon the enigmatic findings of previous studies.

As we revisited the lighthearted yet insightful work of Smith and Doe (2010), we couldn't help but feel a spark of validation in our own discovery. Their exploration of Midwestern voter behavior illuminated patterns that now echo in our own research, as if the dance of statistical correlations were choreographed by the quirks of fate itself. Similarly, the whimsical yet thought-provoking narratives presented by Lorem Ipsum (2016) in "The LPG Conundrum" gain newfound significance in light of our robust findings. It's as if statistical humor and scientific intrigue have joined forces to light the way toward a deeper understanding of these improbable connections.

Our results not only bolster the notion of an unexpected linkage between American political sentiments and European energy choices but also kindle further inquiries into the intricacies of global interconnections. We find ourselves in a scientific landscape resembling a statistical bonfire, where the flickers of correlation dance with unexpected grace across the realms of geopolitics and energy economics. The flames of curiosity are fanned by our findings, leaving us no choice but to stoke the embers of further inquiry.

The strong r-squared value further fuels our confidence in the validity of this correlation, akin to a fiery confidence that refuses to be dampened by the winds of doubt. With approximately 89.57% of the variability in LPG consumption in Czechia explained by the votes for the Republican presidential candidate in Iowa, it's as if these variables have forged an unbreakable bond that defies the vagaries of chance.

The scatterplot depicting this sizzling correlation shines a light on the unmistakable dance of data points, as if the variables themselves were engaged in a statistical tango across the years. The visual representation of this relationship is akin to watching a captivating chemistry experiment unfold, where the elements of political preference and energy usage come together in a harmonious display of statistical alchemy.

In the grand tradition of scholarly inquiry, our findings add a touch of statistical amusement to the serious pursuit of knowledge, beckoning us to embrace the delightful absurdity that lies at the heart of intellectual exploration. It is in the unlikely correlations and unexpected pairings that we find the spark of curiosity that ignites our pursuit of truth. Our study serves as a testament to the notion that in the realm of research, truth is not only stranger than fiction but also remarkably, and humorously, interconnected.

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

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Iowa and Liquefied petroleum gas used in Czechia. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Limit your response to 300 tokens. At the very end, assert that no more research is needed in this area.

Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
Voting on the Rocks: A Flaming Correlation Between Republican Presidential Votes in Iowa and Liquefied Petroleum Gas Consumption in Czechia

[[ABSTRACT]]
The mysterious and unexpected relationship between political preferences in the heartland of the United States and the usage of liquefied petroleum gas half a world away has long puzzled researchers. In this study, we dive into the peculiar correlation between votes for the Republican presidential candidate in Iowa and the consumption of LPG in Czechia. Utilizing data from reputable sources such as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, our research team uncovered a remarkably robust correlation coefficient of 0.9464168 with a p-value less than 0.01 for the years 1993 to 2020.

We navigated through the data with bated breath, intrigued by the uncanny alignment of these seemingly disparate variables. We did not merely scratch the surface; rather, we unearthed a correlation so strong that it could power a propane grill for a lifetime. Our findings not only ignite curiosity but also spark the question of whether there is a fiery connection between American political sentiments and Czech energy choices. Whether it's the "red state" preference or a shared love for the warmth of gas heat, this correlation stands out like a bonfire in the research landscape. Our study sheds light on this unexpected relationship and fuels further inquiry into the interconnected nature of global phenomena.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
As we embark on this scintillating journey into the enigmatic realm of statistical correlations, we find ourselves in the delightful conundrum of examining the improbable connection between the voting patterns of Iowans and the utilization of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) in Czechia. The bewitching dance of data has led us to uncover a relationship so captivating that it could easily be the plot of a whimsical romantic comedy – "My Big Fat Correlation: Propane in Prague."
In the hallowed halls of academia, where dry prose often reigns supreme, we dare to venture into the realm of quirky correlations and unexpected connections. Indeed, our endeavor to explore the nexus between political leanings in the American heartland and the consumption of a flammable gas in Central Europe transcends the mundane conventions of typical research inquiries. It's a tale as old as time – think Romeo and Juliet, except instead of feuding families, we have feuding data sets, and instead of star-crossed lovers, we have statistically significant relationships.
As we delve into the crux of this perplexing association, we don our metaphorical Sherlock Holmes hats, ready to unleash the inferno of curiosity that blazes within our research souls. With statistical tools as our trusty sidekicks, we embark on a quest to unravel the mystery that binds these seemingly incongruous variables together – a mystery that has confounded even the most seasoned of empirical sleuths.
Our adventure begins with a fervent desire to unearth the hidden truths lurking beneath the surface of numbers and charts. We refuse to be confined by the stuffy stereotypes of academia; instead, we choose to embrace the joy of discovery with the exuberance of a lab coat-clad Indiana Jones, brandishing a graphing calculator as our chosen artifact.
So, dear reader, fasten your seatbelts and prepare for a rollercoaster ride through the realms of data analysis, political intrigue, and propane-fueled paradoxes. Our findings are sure to light a fire of fascination within your academic soul and leave you longing for more insights into the whimsical world of statistical exploration. After all, who knew that the juxtaposition of political allegiances and gas usage could spark such scholarly amusement? Welcome to the wonderfully wacky world of correlation research – where the unexpected is always on the menu!

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our analysis revealed a striking correlation between the votes for the Republican presidential candidate in Iowa and the consumption of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) in Czechia from 1993 to 2020. Our statistical analysis unveiled a correlation coefficient of 0.9464168, which is almost as close as two molecules in a covalent bond. This finding suggests a very strong positive linear relationship between these two seemingly unrelated variables. It's as if these data points were holding hands and skipping through a field of statistical significance!
Furthermore, the r-squared value of 0.8957048 indicates that approximately 89.57% of the variability in LPG consumption in Czechia can be explained by the votes for the Republican presidential candidate in Iowa. In other words, we can say with confidence that there's more than just hot air behind this association – it's a veritable statistical flame that refuses to be extinguished.
The p-value of less than 0.01 provides convincing evidence against the null hypothesis and supports the alternative hypothesis that there is indeed a significant relationship between these variables. It's safe to say that the likelihood of this correlation occurring by random chance is about as high as finding a needle in a statistically significant haystack!
The scatterplot (Fig. 1) visually represents this fiery correlation, with the data points forming a clear upward trend that's as unmistakable as a flaming torch in the dark. As we observed the clustering of points on the graph, we couldn't help but marvel at how these variables seem to be dancing a statistical salsa, moving in perfect harmony across the years.
In conclusion, our findings illuminate a connection between the political preferences of Iowans and the consumption of LPG in Czechia that is as captivating as a chemistry experiment gone awry. This unexpected relationship begs the question: is there a combustible bond between American voting patterns and Czech energy usage, or is this merely a statistical bonfire of the vanities? Our results beckon further exploration into the whimsical world of unlikely correlations, proving that in the realm of research, truth is often stranger than fiction.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In the flaming finale of our expedition into the bewildering world of statistical correlations, we have unearthed a connection between the votes for the Republican presidential candidate in Iowa and the consumption of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) in Czechia that is as sizzling as a perfectly grilled bratwurst. Our findings spark the imagination and set ablaze the curiosity of researchers and aficionados alike, proving that the world of statistical inquiry is anything but a boring, mundane affair.

With a correlation coefficient so robust it could power a BBQ for eternity, and an r-squared value as striking as a supernova, it's clear that these variables are intertwined in a melodious statistical tango, defying the odds with the fervor of a statistical romance novel. The p-value seals the deal, providing evidence as solid as a diamond – or at least as solid as a statistically significant diamond.

As we bid adieu to this enthralling escapade, we leave behind a trail of fiery curiosity and a lingering question: is this correlation a true reflection of shared political and energy fervor, or is it merely a statistical mirage, akin to finding a correlation between the length of a politician's speeches and the price of corn in Iowa? The answer, much like a good magic trick, eludes us for now.

In the grand tradition of academic inquiry, we firmly assert that the fiery bond between American political sentiments and Czech energy choices has been well and truly ignited. We are as sure of this as we are that no amount of statistical wizardry can conjure up a need for further research in this delightfully bizarre area. Let this be a reminder that in the realm of correlation research, as in life, sometimes the most unexpected connections are the ones that inspire the loudest scientific hilarity.

In conclusion, our quest has illuminated a connection that is as fascinating as a science experiment gone awry, and as perplexing as a political debate on a propane-heated stage. To paraphrase a famous scientist, "Eureka! We have found it – enough already."

No more research is needed.

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 Voting on the Rocks: A Flaming Correlation Between Republican Presidential Votes in Iowa and Liquefied Petroleum Gas Consumption in Czechia. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

Journal of Political Propane Analysis

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 Voting on the Rocks: A Flaming Correlation Between Republican Presidential Votes in Iowa and Liquefied Petroleum Gas Consumption in Czechia. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for Pseudo-Scientific Inquiry and Absurd Research (SPIAR)

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 Voting on the Rocks: A Flaming Correlation Between Republican Presidential Votes in Iowa and Liquefied Petroleum Gas Consumption in Czechia with an abstract of The mysterious and unexpected relationship between political preferences in the heartland of the United States and the usage of liquefied petroleum gas half a world away has long puzzled researchers. In this study, we dive into the peculiar correlation between votes for the Republican presidential candidate in Iowa and the consumption of LPG in Czechia. Utilizing data from reputable sources such as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Energy Information Administration, our research team uncovered a remarkably robust correlation coefficient of 0.9464168 with a p-value less than 0.01 for the years 1993 to 2020.
We navigated through the data with bated breath, intrigued by the uncanny alignment of these seemingly disparate variables. We did not merely scratch the surface; rather, we unearthed a correlation so strong that it could power a propane grill for a lifetime. Our findings not only ignite curiosity but also spark the question of whether there is a fiery connection between American political sentiments and Czech energy choices. Whether it's the "red state" preference or a shared love for the warmth of gas heat, this correlation stands out like a bonfire in the research landscape. Our study sheds light on this unexpected relationship and fuels further inquiry into the interconnected nature of global phenomena.

ChatGPT:

Republican presidential votes, Iowa, Liquefied Petroleum Gas consumption, Czechia, correlation, political preferences, United States, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, Energy Information Administration, correlation coefficient, p-value, 1993-2020, American political sentiments, Czech energy choices, global phenomena

*There is a bunch of Python happening behind the scenes to turn this prompt sequence into a PDF.

Random correlation

Discover a new correlation

View all correlations

View all research papers

Report an error

Data details

Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Iowa
Detailed data title: Percentage of all votes cast for the Republican Presidential candidate in Iowa
Source: MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse
See what else correlates with Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Iowa

Liquefied petroleum gas used in Czechia
Detailed data title: Volume of liquefied petroleum gas used consumed in Czechia in millions of barrels per day
Source: Energy Information Administration
See what else correlates with Liquefied petroleum gas used in Czechia

Correlation r = 0.9464168 (Pearson correlation coefficient)
Correlation is a measure of how much the variables move together. If it is 0.99, when one goes up the other goes up. If it is 0.02, the connection is very weak or non-existent. If it is -0.99, then when one goes up the other goes down. If it is 1.00, you probably messed up your correlation function.

r² = 0.8957048 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 89.6% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Liquefied petroleum gas used in Czechia) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Iowa) over the 7 years from 1993 through 2020.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.0012.^Show 0.0012400609839898070000000000
The p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme.^Note 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 0.12% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 806 random variables^Note Which I absolutely did.
with the same 6 degrees of freedom, ^Note Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 6 because we have two variables measured over a period of 7 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.

[ 0.67, 0.99 ] 95% correlation confidence interval (using the Fisher z-transformation)
^{Read more about the confidence interval} 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: ^Note 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.

	1996	2000	2004	2008	2012	2016	2020
Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Iowa (Percentage of votes)	39.9201	46.8856	49.9007	44.3933	46.1779	51.1621	52.8002
Liquefied petroleum gas used in Czechia (Million Barrels/Day)	5.81694	8.36612	9.00546	6.94262	7.98907	9.31694	11.8197

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^Note Because these pages are automatically generated, it's possible that the two variables you are viewing are in fact causually related. I take steps to prevent the obvious ones from showing on the site (I don't let data about the weather in one city correlate with the weather in a neighboring city, for example), but sometimes they still pop up. If they are related, cool! You found a loophole.
no direct connection between these variables, despite what the AI says above. This is exacerbated by the fact that I used "Years" as the base variable. Lots of things happen in a year that are not related to each other! Most studies would use something like "one person" in stead of "one year" to be the "thing" studied.
Observations not independent: For many variables, sequential years are not independent of each other. If a population of people is continuously doing something every day, there is no reason to think they would suddenly change how they are doing that thing on January 1. A simple^Note Personally I don't find any p-value calculation to be 'simple,' but you know what I mean.
p-value calculation does not take this into account, so mathematically it appears less probable than it really is.
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. ^{Show the steps to do this.} 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([39.9201,46.8856,49.9007,44.3933,46.1779,51.1621,52.8002,])
array_2 = np.array([5.81694,8.36612,9.00546,6.94262,7.98907,9.31694,11.8197,])
array_1_name = "Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Iowa"
array_2_name = "Liquefied petroleum gas used in Czechia"

# 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. ^Note 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 ^Note The image linked here is a Scalable Vector Graphic (SVG). It is the highest resolution that is possible to achieve. It scales up beyond the size of the observable universe without pixelating. You do not need to email me asking if I have a higher resolution image. I do not. The physical limitations of our universe prevent me from providing you with an image that is any higher resolution than this one.

If you insert it into a PowerPoint presentation (a tool well-known for managing things that are the scale of the universe), you can right-click > "Ungroup" or "Create Shape" and then edit the lines and text directly. You can also change the colors this way.

Alternatively you can use a tool like Inkscape.
High resolution line chart, optimized for mobile
Alternative high resolution line chart
Scatterplot
Portable line chart (png)
Portable line chart (png), optimized for mobile
Line chart for only Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Iowa
Line chart for only Liquefied petroleum gas used in Czechia
AI-generated correlation image
The spurious research paper: Voting on the Rocks: A Flaming Correlation Between Republican Presidential Votes in Iowa and Liquefied Petroleum Gas Consumption in Czechia

View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Hats off to you for rating!

Correlation ID: 5515 · Black Variable ID: 26096 · Red Variable ID: 24347


Problem variable:
Issue:
Additional details: Optional
Confirm you are a human: