about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #5,552 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is US household spending on books and the second variable is Air pollution in New Haven, Connecticut.  The chart goes from 2000 to 2022, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As US households spent less on books, there was a slight reduction in paper production. With a lower demand for paper, there were fewer trucks transporting paper to printing facilities, thus leading to a minor decrease in air pollution in New Haven. All because some people decided to put down the latest bestseller!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image of a cozy living room, bathed in calming neon vaporwave hues. A stack of beloved books is neatly arranged on a wooden shelf, emitting a soft glow. A family is settled in, enjoying a tranquil evening. Beyond the window, a few passing trucks emit subtle vaporwave-inspired patterns, symbolizing the decrease in paper transportation. The air in New Haven seems lighter, and the clear sky reflects the reduction in air pollution. 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: US household spending on books and Air pollution in New Haven, Connecticut. Given these, which of the following image style descriptions seems most appropriate? Pick the one that seems to be related to one of the variables at hand. Please respond with only one of the following potential descriptions: A comic-book-style illustration with muted colors and a dotted halftone pattern from the 1960s Art nouveau Vaporwave Hyper-realistic Cute 2D animation
ChatGPT: Vaporwave

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 US household spending on books and Air pollution in New Haven, Connecticut, in the following situation: As US households spent less on books, there was a slight reduction in paper production. With a lower demand for paper, there were fewer trucks transporting paper to printing facilities, thus leading to a minor decrease in air pollution in New Haven. All because some people decided to put down the latest bestseller!. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a cozy living room, a stack of beloved books sits neatly on a wooden shelf, while a family settles in to enjoy a quiet evening. Outside the window, fewer trucks rumble down the road, carrying less paper to printing facilities. The air in New Haven feels a little lighter, and the sky appears a bit clearer, as the slight reduction in paper production has led to a minor decrease in air pollution.

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: [ Vaporwave ] and depicting this scene: In a cozy living room, a stack of beloved books sits neatly on a wooden shelf, while a family settles in to enjoy a quiet evening. Outside the window, fewer trucks rumble down the road, carrying less paper to printing facilities. The air in New Haven feels a little lighter, and the sky appears a bit clearer, as the slight reduction in paper production has led to a minor decrease in air pollution. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image of a cozy living room, bathed in calming neon vaporwave hues. A stack of beloved books is neatly arranged on a wooden shelf, emitting a soft glow. A family is settled in, enjoying a tranquil evening. Beyond the window, a few passing trucks emit subtle vaporwave-inspired patterns, symbolizing the decrease in paper transportation. The air in New Haven seems lighter, and the clear sky reflects the reduction in air pollution.

*Variations in the User Prompts from chart to chart are just the result of random number generation in Python. I wrote a few arrays of various styles and methods to ask questions to change up the results. Every time this site writes an explanation or generates an image, the script picks from each at random.

I sequence the requests into multiple prompts because I find GPT 3.5 to perform much better with short, well-managed contexts. Thus, I track the context directly in Python and only ask ChatGPT targeted questions.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 (fine-tuned)
System prompt: You provide humorous responses in the form of plausible sounding explanations for correlations. You assume the correlation is causative for the purpose of the explanation even if it is ridiculous. You do not chat with the user, you only reply with the causal connection explanation and nothing else.
User prompt: Please make up a funny explanation for how a decrease in US household spending on books caused Air pollution in New Haven, Connecticut to decrease.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
The Tale of Yale: The Link Between Book Sale and Air Pollution Prevail

The Journal of Ecological Economics and Epidemiology

Jan 2024

Reminder: This paper is AI-generated. Not real!
Quick note: This sequence is long and repetitive. That's how the prompt engineering works for this one. I manage the output in Python to format it into this PDF.




Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.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 US household spending on books and Air pollution in New Haven, Connecticut. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

Rhyme words in the title.

Your research team used data from Bureau of Labor Statistics and Environmental Protection Agency to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9024174 and p < 0.01 for 2000 to 2022.

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]]
The Tale of Yale: The Link Between Book Sale and Air Pollution Prevail

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the intriguing relationship between household spending on books and air pollution in New Haven, Connecticut. Drawing data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Environmental Protection Agency, we quantitatively evaluated the connection between these seemingly disparate variables. Our findings revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9024174 and a statistically significant p-value below 0.01, indicating a robust relationship between the two factors over the period from 2000 to 2022.

With as much fervor as a book lover searching for the perfect reading spot, our team set out to unravel this quizzical puzzle. Through rigorous statistical analysis, we uncovered a connection as clear as a well-written plot twist. Just as a book's conclusion ties up loose ends, our findings intricately linked household spending on books to air pollution levels, leaving us breathless from the unexpected twist in the narrative.

In discussing our results, we couldn't help but ponder: "Why don't books ever get cold?" Because they have so many "covers"! Despite the laughter-inducing dad joke, our research highlights the importance of considering non-traditional factors when examining environmental phenomena. This study encourages further exploration of the complex web of interactions between human behavior and environmental outcomes, and we hope it motivates future researchers to dive into similarly unexpected connections.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.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 US household spending on books and Air pollution in New Haven, Connecticut. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
The Tale of Yale: The Link Between Book Sale and Air Pollution Prevail

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the intriguing relationship between household spending on books and air pollution in New Haven, Connecticut. Drawing data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Environmental Protection Agency, we quantitatively evaluated the connection between these seemingly disparate variables. Our findings revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9024174 and a statistically significant p-value below 0.01, indicating a robust relationship between the two factors over the period from 2000 to 2022.

With as much fervor as a book lover searching for the perfect reading spot, our team set out to unravel this quizzical puzzle. Through rigorous statistical analysis, we uncovered a connection as clear as a well-written plot twist. Just as a book's conclusion ties up loose ends, our findings intricately linked household spending on books to air pollution levels, leaving us breathless from the unexpected twist in the narrative.

In discussing our results, we couldn't help but ponder: "Why don't books ever get cold?" Because they have so many "covers"! Despite the laughter-inducing dad joke, our research highlights the importance of considering non-traditional factors when examining environmental phenomena. This study encourages further exploration of the complex web of interactions between human behavior and environmental outcomes, and we hope it motivates future researchers to dive into similarly unexpected connections.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

The relationship between household spending habits and environmental conditions has been a subject of intrigue and curiosity, akin to an unexpected plot twist in a classic novel. The connection between consumer behavior, particularly expenditures on books, and air pollution levels has elicited interest and speculation among researchers and the public alike. As we embarked on this investigation, we found ourselves asking, "Why did the statistician break up with the librarian? Because they weren't a good match - their interests were not aligned!" Humor aside, this study endeavors to shed light on the often-overlooked association between the purchase of books and the quality of the air we breathe, utilizing robust empirical evidence to uncover the narrative between these seemingly unrelated variables.

The setting of our exploration, New Haven, Connecticut, provided an ideal backdrop for examining the relationship between book spending and air quality. The city's rich literary history, home to prestigious institutions such as Yale University and a vibrant community of bibliophiles, presented an intriguing context for our investigation. However, amidst the allure of literary pursuits, New Haven also grapples with air pollution challenges, prompting us to delve into the question: "Why do we never lend books to elephants? They always return them with wrinkled trunks!" With a lighthearted spirit, this inquiry seeks to discern the intricate connections between intellectual engagement and environmental realities, offering a fresh perspective on the dynamics of urban life.

Our exploration is as novel as a rare first edition, as we leverage empirical data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Environmental Protection Agency to analyze the correlation between household book expenditures and air pollution indicators over a substantial timeframe. Our statistical approach, akin to a sleuth solving a mystery, endeavors to unravel the nuances of this relationship, consolidating quantitative evidence to untangle the narrative strands between literary pursuits and atmospheric conditions.

The importance of this investigation cannot be overstated, and neither can a good book. Just as a compelling narrative captivates its readers, our findings seek to captivate the academic community and public alike, emphasizing the significance of considering unconventional factors in environmental analyses. With each surprising twist and turn in our results, we aim to stimulate further research inquiries and inspire future studies to delve deeper into the interconnected tales of consumer behavior and environmental impacts.

In the pursuit of scientific inquiry, we must remain as open-minded as a well-read book: willing to explore unexpected connections and embrace the unforeseen correlations that hide within the pages of seemingly unrelated variables. As we embark on this scholarly endeavor, let us remember the enduring wisdom of Mark Twain, who aptly remarked, "To get the full value of joy, you must have someone to divide it with." In a similar vein, to fully appreciate the findings of this research, we invite fellow academics and enthusiasts to join us in uncovering the shared story of book sales and air pollution - a tale that promises to intrigue and surprise, much like a well-crafted punchline.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.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 US household spending on books and Air pollution in New Haven, Connecticut. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

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]]
The Tale of Yale: The Link Between Book Sale and Air Pollution Prevail

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the intriguing relationship between household spending on books and air pollution in New Haven, Connecticut. Drawing data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Environmental Protection Agency, we quantitatively evaluated the connection between these seemingly disparate variables. Our findings revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9024174 and a statistically significant p-value below 0.01, indicating a robust relationship between the two factors over the period from 2000 to 2022.

With as much fervor as a book lover searching for the perfect reading spot, our team set out to unravel this quizzical puzzle. Through rigorous statistical analysis, we uncovered a connection as clear as a well-written plot twist. Just as a book's conclusion ties up loose ends, our findings intricately linked household spending on books to air pollution levels, leaving us breathless from the unexpected twist in the narrative.

In discussing our results, we couldn't help but ponder: "Why don't books ever get cold?" Because they have so many "covers"! Despite the laughter-inducing dad joke, our research highlights the importance of considering non-traditional factors when examining environmental phenomena. This study encourages further exploration of the complex web of interactions between human behavior and environmental outcomes, and we hope it motivates future researchers to dive into similarly unexpected connections.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The relationship between household spending habits and environmental conditions has been a subject of intrigue and curiosity, akin to an unexpected plot twist in a classic novel. The connection between consumer behavior, particularly expenditures on books, and air pollution levels has elicited interest and speculation among researchers and the public alike. As we embarked on this investigation, we found ourselves asking, "Why did the statistician break up with the librarian? Because they weren't a good match - their interests were not aligned!" Humor aside, this study endeavors to shed light on the often-overlooked association between the purchase of books and the quality of the air we breathe, utilizing robust empirical evidence to uncover the narrative between these seemingly unrelated variables.
The setting of our exploration, New Haven, Connecticut, provided an ideal backdrop for examining the relationship between book spending and air quality. The city's rich literary history, home to prestigious institutions such as Yale University and a vibrant community of bibliophiles, presented an intriguing context for our investigation. However, amidst the allure of literary pursuits, New Haven also grapples with air pollution challenges, prompting us to delve into the question: "Why do we never lend books to elephants? They always return them with wrinkled trunks!" With a lighthearted spirit, this inquiry seeks to discern the intricate connections between intellectual engagement and environmental realities, offering a fresh perspective on the dynamics of urban life.
Our exploration is as novel as a rare first edition, as we leverage empirical data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Environmental Protection Agency to analyze the correlation between household book expenditures and air pollution indicators over a substantial timeframe. Our statistical approach, akin to a sleuth solving a mystery, endeavors to unravel the nuances of this relationship, consolidating quantitative evidence to untangle the narrative strands between literary pursuits and atmospheric conditions.
The importance of this investigation cannot be overstated, and neither can a good book. Just as a compelling narrative captivates its readers, our findings seek to captivate the academic community and public alike, emphasizing the significance of considering unconventional factors in environmental analyses. With each surprising twist and turn in our results, we aim to stimulate further research inquiries and inspire future studies to delve deeper into the interconnected tales of consumer behavior and environmental impacts.
In the pursuit of scientific inquiry, we must remain as open-minded as a well-read book: willing to explore unexpected connections and embrace the unforeseen correlations that hide within the pages of seemingly unrelated variables. As we embark on this scholarly endeavor, let us remember the enduring wisdom of Mark Twain, who aptly remarked, "To get the full value of joy, you must have someone to divide it with." In a similar vein, to fully appreciate the findings of this research, we invite fellow academics and enthusiasts to join us in uncovering the shared story of book sales and air pollution - a tale that promises to intrigue and surprise, much like a well-crafted punchline.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The relationship between household spending on books and environmental conditions has been an area of increasing interest within the scholarly community. Smith et al. (2018) assert novel connections between consumer behavior and air pollution levels, prompting the exploration of unexpected correlations. However, the prevalent literature surrounding this connection remains as mysterious as a locked-room murder plot, leaving many questions unanswered. As we unravel this enigma, let's not forget a pertinent joke: "What do you call an English teacher who can't read? Unbelievable!" Indeed, the findings delineated in this section hope to bring light to an often overlooked, yet captivating, area of research.

Moving from serious studies to the lighter side of the academic realm, the world of books undoubtedly plays a pivotal role in shaping human behavior and its environmental repercussions. Works such as "The Omnivore's Dilemma" by Michael Pollan and "Silent Spring" by Rachel Carson provide vital insights into the intricate relationship between human activities and ecological well-being. The literature is as diverse as a library's shelves, encompassing a wide array of perspectives and, as a result, imbuing our exploration with richness akin to a complex character arc.

In a twist worthy of a genre-bending thriller, we turn our attention to fictional narratives that may hold relevance to our investigative pursuits. J.D. Salinger's "The Catcher in the Rye" and Haruki Murakami's "Norwegian Wood" offer poignant reflections on the human condition and the existential yearning for connection, themes that resonate with the intricacies of environmental interconnectedness. As we delve into the literary domain, let's pause for an equally pertinent dad joke: "I'm reading a book on anti-gravity. It's impossible to put down!" A bit of laughter amidst scholarly pursuit never hurt anyone, after all.

While the pursuit of academic inquiry remains our primary focus, it would be remiss not to acknowledge the tangential connections found in popular culture. Movies such as "Dead Poets Society" and "Good Will Hunting" offer nuanced portrayals of the transformative power of literature and intellectual engagement, propelling our understanding of the societal impact of book consumption. After all, a well-crafted film can be as captivating as a page-turning novel, and equally capable of shedding light on the human experience.

In summary, our review of the literature paints a vivid picture of the multifaceted relationship between household spending on books and environmental outcomes. Through an exploration that straddles the serious and the spirited, we aim to enrich the scholarly discourse with a touch of humor and a keen eye for unexpected correlations. As we move forward in our analysis, let us remember the wise words of Ernest Hemingway, who remarked, "There is no friend as loyal as a book." In a similar vein, our research endeavors to unravel the complex dynamics of human behavior and environmental realities, inspiring curiosity and camaraderie in equal measure.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.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 US household spending on books and Air pollution in New Haven, Connecticut. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Bureau of Labor Statistics and Environmental Protection Agency . You used data from 2000 to 2022

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]]
The Tale of Yale: The Link Between Book Sale and Air Pollution Prevail

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the intriguing relationship between household spending on books and air pollution in New Haven, Connecticut. Drawing data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Environmental Protection Agency, we quantitatively evaluated the connection between these seemingly disparate variables. Our findings revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9024174 and a statistically significant p-value below 0.01, indicating a robust relationship between the two factors over the period from 2000 to 2022.

With as much fervor as a book lover searching for the perfect reading spot, our team set out to unravel this quizzical puzzle. Through rigorous statistical analysis, we uncovered a connection as clear as a well-written plot twist. Just as a book's conclusion ties up loose ends, our findings intricately linked household spending on books to air pollution levels, leaving us breathless from the unexpected twist in the narrative.

In discussing our results, we couldn't help but ponder: "Why don't books ever get cold?" Because they have so many "covers"! Despite the laughter-inducing dad joke, our research highlights the importance of considering non-traditional factors when examining environmental phenomena. This study encourages further exploration of the complex web of interactions between human behavior and environmental outcomes, and we hope it motivates future researchers to dive into similarly unexpected connections.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
The relationship between household spending habits and environmental conditions has been a subject of intrigue and curiosity, akin to an unexpected plot twist in a classic novel. The connection between consumer behavior, particularly expenditures on books, and air pollution levels has elicited interest and speculation among researchers and the public alike. As we embarked on this investigation, we found ourselves asking, "Why did the statistician break up with the librarian? Because they weren't a good match - their interests were not aligned!" Humor aside, this study endeavors to shed light on the often-overlooked association between the purchase of books and the quality of the air we breathe, utilizing robust empirical evidence to uncover the narrative between these seemingly unrelated variables.
The setting of our exploration, New Haven, Connecticut, provided an ideal backdrop for examining the relationship between book spending and air quality. The city's rich literary history, home to prestigious institutions such as Yale University and a vibrant community of bibliophiles, presented an intriguing context for our investigation. However, amidst the allure of literary pursuits, New Haven also grapples with air pollution challenges, prompting us to delve into the question: "Why do we never lend books to elephants? They always return them with wrinkled trunks!" With a lighthearted spirit, this inquiry seeks to discern the intricate connections between intellectual engagement and environmental realities, offering a fresh perspective on the dynamics of urban life.
Our exploration is as novel as a rare first edition, as we leverage empirical data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Environmental Protection Agency to analyze the correlation between household book expenditures and air pollution indicators over a substantial timeframe. Our statistical approach, akin to a sleuth solving a mystery, endeavors to unravel the nuances of this relationship, consolidating quantitative evidence to untangle the narrative strands between literary pursuits and atmospheric conditions.
The importance of this investigation cannot be overstated, and neither can a good book. Just as a compelling narrative captivates its readers, our findings seek to captivate the academic community and public alike, emphasizing the significance of considering unconventional factors in environmental analyses. With each surprising twist and turn in our results, we aim to stimulate further research inquiries and inspire future studies to delve deeper into the interconnected tales of consumer behavior and environmental impacts.
In the pursuit of scientific inquiry, we must remain as open-minded as a well-read book: willing to explore unexpected connections and embrace the unforeseen correlations that hide within the pages of seemingly unrelated variables. As we embark on this scholarly endeavor, let us remember the enduring wisdom of Mark Twain, who aptly remarked, "To get the full value of joy, you must have someone to divide it with." In a similar vein, to fully appreciate the findings of this research, we invite fellow academics and enthusiasts to join us in uncovering the shared story of book sales and air pollution - a tale that promises to intrigue and surprise, much like a well-crafted punchline.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To unravel the enigmatic connection between household spending on books and air pollution in New Haven, Connecticut, our research team employed a combination of data collection, rigorous statistical analysis, and the occasional chuckle-inducing dad joke. We cast our net far and wide, scouring the internet for relevant data, but ultimately relied on the treasure troves of information provided by the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Environmental Protection Agency. Our data spans the years from 2000 to 2022, allowing us to capture a comprehensive snapshot of the evolving relationship between these whimsically intertwined variables.

In the immortal words of Shakespeare, "This above all: to thine own self be true..." and to our statistical model, we remained true. Our research methodology, like a well-worn plot structure, followed a structured approach to analyze the connection between household book expenditures and air pollution levels. Employing a series of multivariate regression analyses and time-series modeling, we sought to uncover the underlying patterns in the data, much like a detective unraveling a particularly curious mystery novel.

Our model incorporated various control variables, including but not limited to population density, economic indicators, meteorological data, and additional contextual factors. We wanted to ensure that our analysis was as comprehensive as a library catalog, leaving no stone unturned in capturing the complexity of this seemingly unexpected relationship. As social scientists, we understand the need to approach our research with both precision and humor, much like a well-timed punchline in an otherwise serious academic discourse.

Additionally, we employed sophisticated techniques to address potential confounding factors and biases, exemplifying a dedication to scientific rigor while occasionally sprinkling in a good pun for good measure. As a result, our statistical findings emerged with clarity and robustness, casting light on the curious connection between the purchase of books and the quality of the air we breathe. After all, what's a research paper without a little comedic relief to break up the statistical density?


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.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 US household spending on books and Air pollution in New Haven, Connecticut. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Bureau of Labor Statistics and Environmental Protection Agency .

For the time period 2000 to 2022, you found a correlation 0.9024174, r-squared of 0.8143571, 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]]
The Tale of Yale: The Link Between Book Sale and Air Pollution Prevail

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the intriguing relationship between household spending on books and air pollution in New Haven, Connecticut. Drawing data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Environmental Protection Agency, we quantitatively evaluated the connection between these seemingly disparate variables. Our findings revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9024174 and a statistically significant p-value below 0.01, indicating a robust relationship between the two factors over the period from 2000 to 2022.

With as much fervor as a book lover searching for the perfect reading spot, our team set out to unravel this quizzical puzzle. Through rigorous statistical analysis, we uncovered a connection as clear as a well-written plot twist. Just as a book's conclusion ties up loose ends, our findings intricately linked household spending on books to air pollution levels, leaving us breathless from the unexpected twist in the narrative.

In discussing our results, we couldn't help but ponder: "Why don't books ever get cold?" Because they have so many "covers"! Despite the laughter-inducing dad joke, our research highlights the importance of considering non-traditional factors when examining environmental phenomena. This study encourages further exploration of the complex web of interactions between human behavior and environmental outcomes, and we hope it motivates future researchers to dive into similarly unexpected connections.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
The relationship between household spending habits and environmental conditions has been a subject of intrigue and curiosity, akin to an unexpected plot twist in a classic novel. The connection between consumer behavior, particularly expenditures on books, and air pollution levels has elicited interest and speculation among researchers and the public alike. As we embarked on this investigation, we found ourselves asking, "Why did the statistician break up with the librarian? Because they weren't a good match - their interests were not aligned!" Humor aside, this study endeavors to shed light on the often-overlooked association between the purchase of books and the quality of the air we breathe, utilizing robust empirical evidence to uncover the narrative between these seemingly unrelated variables.
The setting of our exploration, New Haven, Connecticut, provided an ideal backdrop for examining the relationship between book spending and air quality. The city's rich literary history, home to prestigious institutions such as Yale University and a vibrant community of bibliophiles, presented an intriguing context for our investigation. However, amidst the allure of literary pursuits, New Haven also grapples with air pollution challenges, prompting us to delve into the question: "Why do we never lend books to elephants? They always return them with wrinkled trunks!" With a lighthearted spirit, this inquiry seeks to discern the intricate connections between intellectual engagement and environmental realities, offering a fresh perspective on the dynamics of urban life.
Our exploration is as novel as a rare first edition, as we leverage empirical data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Environmental Protection Agency to analyze the correlation between household book expenditures and air pollution indicators over a substantial timeframe. Our statistical approach, akin to a sleuth solving a mystery, endeavors to unravel the nuances of this relationship, consolidating quantitative evidence to untangle the narrative strands between literary pursuits and atmospheric conditions.
The importance of this investigation cannot be overstated, and neither can a good book. Just as a compelling narrative captivates its readers, our findings seek to captivate the academic community and public alike, emphasizing the significance of considering unconventional factors in environmental analyses. With each surprising twist and turn in our results, we aim to stimulate further research inquiries and inspire future studies to delve deeper into the interconnected tales of consumer behavior and environmental impacts.
In the pursuit of scientific inquiry, we must remain as open-minded as a well-read book: willing to explore unexpected connections and embrace the unforeseen correlations that hide within the pages of seemingly unrelated variables. As we embark on this scholarly endeavor, let us remember the enduring wisdom of Mark Twain, who aptly remarked, "To get the full value of joy, you must have someone to divide it with." In a similar vein, to fully appreciate the findings of this research, we invite fellow academics and enthusiasts to join us in uncovering the shared story of book sales and air pollution - a tale that promises to intrigue and surprise, much like a well-crafted punchline.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The results of our investigation unearthed a striking correlation between household spending on books and air pollution levels in New Haven, Connecticut. With a correlation coefficient of 0.9024174, our findings revealed a robust and significant relationship between these seemingly incongruous variables. This correlation coefficient, akin to a well-worn bookmark, effectively guides us through the compelling narrative of the intertwined tale of book sales and air pollution. The r-squared value of 0.8143571 underscores the strength of this connection, solidifying the bond between literary indulgence and atmospheric quality.

Fig. 1 showcases a scatterplot, vividly illustrating the strong correlation between household expenditures on books and air pollution levels. The data points dance across the plot like characters in a well-written novel, weaving a compelling story of their interconnectedness.

As we unraveled this unexpected connection, we couldn't help but reflect on a fitting dad joke: "Why did the reading lamp go to therapy? It had too many issues!" Just as this pun brings a smile, our research findings offer an unexpected twist in the understanding of environmental dynamics, emphasizing the importance of delving into unexplored relationships between human behavior and ecological outcomes.

The statistically significant p-value below 0.01 further underscores the credibility and reliability of our findings, providing compelling evidence that the link between household book spending and air pollution is not attributable to mere chance. Our research has cast a spotlight on the untold narrative between literary engagement and atmospheric conditions, challenging conventional wisdom and stimulating further inquiry into the unexpected connections that enrich our understanding of urban environments.

In light of these remarkable results, we are reminded of the enduring wisdom of a well-loved book: "You cannot open a book without learning something new," remarked by Confucius. In a similar vein, our research has unveiled a captivating story hidden within the folds of everyday consumer behavior and environmental repercussions, illuminating a previously undiscovered chapter in the chronicles of urban dynamics. This study serves as a testament to the captivating nature of research and the intriguing tales that await discovery within the most unlikely of correlations.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.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 US household spending on books and Air pollution in New Haven, Connecticut. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

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]]
The Tale of Yale: The Link Between Book Sale and Air Pollution Prevail

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the intriguing relationship between household spending on books and air pollution in New Haven, Connecticut. Drawing data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Environmental Protection Agency, we quantitatively evaluated the connection between these seemingly disparate variables. Our findings revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9024174 and a statistically significant p-value below 0.01, indicating a robust relationship between the two factors over the period from 2000 to 2022.

With as much fervor as a book lover searching for the perfect reading spot, our team set out to unravel this quizzical puzzle. Through rigorous statistical analysis, we uncovered a connection as clear as a well-written plot twist. Just as a book's conclusion ties up loose ends, our findings intricately linked household spending on books to air pollution levels, leaving us breathless from the unexpected twist in the narrative.

In discussing our results, we couldn't help but ponder: "Why don't books ever get cold?" Because they have so many "covers"! Despite the laughter-inducing dad joke, our research highlights the importance of considering non-traditional factors when examining environmental phenomena. This study encourages further exploration of the complex web of interactions between human behavior and environmental outcomes, and we hope it motivates future researchers to dive into similarly unexpected connections.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The relationship between household spending on books and environmental conditions has been an area of increasing interest within the scholarly community. Smith et al. (2018) assert novel connections between consumer behavior and air pollution levels, prompting the exploration of unexpected correlations. However, the prevalent literature surrounding this connection remains as mysterious as a locked-room murder plot, leaving many questions unanswered. As we unravel this enigma, let's not forget a pertinent joke: "What do you call an English teacher who can't read? Unbelievable!" Indeed, the findings delineated in this section hope to bring light to an often overlooked, yet captivating, area of research.
Moving from serious studies to the lighter side of the academic realm, the world of books undoubtedly plays a pivotal role in shaping human behavior and its environmental repercussions. Works such as "The Omnivore's Dilemma" by Michael Pollan and "Silent Spring" by Rachel Carson provide vital insights into the intricate relationship between human activities and ecological well-being. The literature is as diverse as a library's shelves, encompassing a wide array of perspectives and, as a result, imbuing our exploration with richness akin to a complex character arc.
In a twist worthy of a genre-bending thriller, we turn our attention to fictional narratives that may hold relevance to our investigative pursuits. J.D. Salinger's "The Catcher in the Rye" and Haruki Murakami's "Norwegian Wood" offer poignant reflections on the human condition and the existential yearning for connection, themes that resonate with the intricacies of environmental interconnectedness. As we delve into the literary domain, let's pause for an equally pertinent dad joke: "I'm reading a book on anti-gravity. It's impossible to put down!" A bit of laughter amidst scholarly pursuit never hurt anyone, after all.
While the pursuit of academic inquiry remains our primary focus, it would be remiss not to acknowledge the tangential connections found in popular culture. Movies such as "Dead Poets Society" and "Good Will Hunting" offer nuanced portrayals of the transformative power of literature and intellectual engagement, propelling our understanding of the societal impact of book consumption. After all, a well-crafted film can be as captivating as a page-turning novel, and equally capable of shedding light on the human experience.
In summary, our review of the literature paints a vivid picture of the multifaceted relationship between household spending on books and environmental outcomes. Through an exploration that straddles the serious and the spirited, we aim to enrich the scholarly discourse with a touch of humor and a keen eye for unexpected correlations. As we move forward in our analysis, let us remember the wise words of Ernest Hemingway, who remarked, "There is no friend as loyal as a book." In a similar vein, our research endeavors to unravel the complex dynamics of human behavior and environmental realities, inspiring curiosity and camaraderie in equal measure.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our investigation unearthed a striking correlation between household spending on books and air pollution levels in New Haven, Connecticut. With a correlation coefficient of 0.9024174, our findings revealed a robust and significant relationship between these seemingly incongruous variables. This correlation coefficient, akin to a well-worn bookmark, effectively guides us through the compelling narrative of the intertwined tale of book sales and air pollution. The r-squared value of 0.8143571 underscores the strength of this connection, solidifying the bond between literary indulgence and atmospheric quality.
Fig. 1 showcases a scatterplot, vividly illustrating the strong correlation between household expenditures on books and air pollution levels. The data points dance across the plot like characters in a well-written novel, weaving a compelling story of their interconnectedness.
As we unraveled this unexpected connection, we couldn't help but reflect on a fitting dad joke: "Why did the reading lamp go to therapy? It had too many issues!" Just as this pun brings a smile, our research findings offer an unexpected twist in the understanding of environmental dynamics, emphasizing the importance of delving into unexplored relationships between human behavior and ecological outcomes.
The statistically significant p-value below 0.01 further underscores the credibility and reliability of our findings, providing compelling evidence that the link between household book spending and air pollution is not attributable to mere chance. Our research has cast a spotlight on the untold narrative between literary engagement and atmospheric conditions, challenging conventional wisdom and stimulating further inquiry into the unexpected connections that enrich our understanding of urban environments.
In light of these remarkable results, we are reminded of the enduring wisdom of a well-loved book: "You cannot open a book without learning something new," remarked by Confucius. In a similar vein, our research has unveiled a captivating story hidden within the folds of everyday consumer behavior and environmental repercussions, illuminating a previously undiscovered chapter in the chronicles of urban dynamics. This study serves as a testament to the captivating nature of research and the intriguing tales that await discovery within the most unlikely of correlations.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Our study embarked on an unconventional journey to explore the intriguing link between household spending on books and air pollution levels in New Haven, Connecticut. The findings from our investigation not only brought this unexpected correlation to light but also added a touch of whimsy to the serious realm of environmental research. As we unravel this seemingly peculiar connection, we are reminded of the old joke: "Books are fantastic; they really draw you in." Yet, our results are no fiction—they lend unequivocal support to prior research that has hinted at the intertwining of consumer behavior and environmental conditions.

Our analysis aligns with the work of Smith et al. (2018), who probed into the curious interplay between consumer behavior and air pollution. Just as a skilled author plants subtle hints throughout a story, we too have fleshed out the ties between literature and urban ecology. The significant correlation coefficient and r-squared value solidify the credibility of our findings, echoing the robustness of prior inquiries into similar nontraditional relationships. This robustness of the data is as reliable as a well-crafted plot twist, providing a meaningful narrative arc to our exploration of book sales and air pollution.

Drawing on the theoretical foundations laid out by literature such as "The Omnivore's Dilemma" and "Silent Spring," our study uncovers a tangible connection between household book expenditures and atmospheric quality. Just as these seminal works enriched our understanding of the interweaving threads of human activity and environmental well-being, our research adds a new chapter to the saga of unexpected correlations. The statistically significant p-value below 0.01 serves as the denouement of our investigation, affirming the materialization of this unlikely bond and laying to rest any lingering doubts about the relevance of book consumption to air pollution levels.

As we reflect on the intriguing findings of our study, it's hard to resist a well-timed dad joke: "I've been reading a book on anti-gravity; it's impossible to put down!" Indeed, just as this pun brings a chuckle, our research adds a comic twist to the otherwise serious discussion of environmental dynamics, urging a closer examination of the everyday activities that shape our urban ecosystems.

Furthermore, our results prompt a reconsideration of the broader societal impact of literature consumption. Much like the transformative narratives portrayed in "Dead Poets Society" and "Good Will Hunting," the implications of our findings extend beyond the realm of statistical analysis. They beckon us to recognize the intricate web of human behavior and environmental consequences, much like a compelling literary analysis uncovers layers of meaning within a text.

In summary, our study significantly advances the understanding of the unsuspected connection between household spending on books and air pollution in New Haven, Connecticut. The unexpected correlation coefficient and p-value inform a powerful storyline that invites further investigation into the complex, often overlooked ties between consumer choices and urban environmental conditions. Just as a well-loved book never ceases to surprise, our research breathes new life into the scholarly discourse, stirring contemplation and curiosity with each turn of the page.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.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 US household spending on books and Air pollution in New Haven, Connecticut. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

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]]
The Tale of Yale: The Link Between Book Sale and Air Pollution Prevail

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the intriguing relationship between household spending on books and air pollution in New Haven, Connecticut. Drawing data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Environmental Protection Agency, we quantitatively evaluated the connection between these seemingly disparate variables. Our findings revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9024174 and a statistically significant p-value below 0.01, indicating a robust relationship between the two factors over the period from 2000 to 2022.

With as much fervor as a book lover searching for the perfect reading spot, our team set out to unravel this quizzical puzzle. Through rigorous statistical analysis, we uncovered a connection as clear as a well-written plot twist. Just as a book's conclusion ties up loose ends, our findings intricately linked household spending on books to air pollution levels, leaving us breathless from the unexpected twist in the narrative.

In discussing our results, we couldn't help but ponder: "Why don't books ever get cold?" Because they have so many "covers"! Despite the laughter-inducing dad joke, our research highlights the importance of considering non-traditional factors when examining environmental phenomena. This study encourages further exploration of the complex web of interactions between human behavior and environmental outcomes, and we hope it motivates future researchers to dive into similarly unexpected connections.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
The relationship between household spending habits and environmental conditions has been a subject of intrigue and curiosity, akin to an unexpected plot twist in a classic novel. The connection between consumer behavior, particularly expenditures on books, and air pollution levels has elicited interest and speculation among researchers and the public alike. As we embarked on this investigation, we found ourselves asking, "Why did the statistician break up with the librarian? Because they weren't a good match - their interests were not aligned!" Humor aside, this study endeavors to shed light on the often-overlooked association between the purchase of books and the quality of the air we breathe, utilizing robust empirical evidence to uncover the narrative between these seemingly unrelated variables.
The setting of our exploration, New Haven, Connecticut, provided an ideal backdrop for examining the relationship between book spending and air quality. The city's rich literary history, home to prestigious institutions such as Yale University and a vibrant community of bibliophiles, presented an intriguing context for our investigation. However, amidst the allure of literary pursuits, New Haven also grapples with air pollution challenges, prompting us to delve into the question: "Why do we never lend books to elephants? They always return them with wrinkled trunks!" With a lighthearted spirit, this inquiry seeks to discern the intricate connections between intellectual engagement and environmental realities, offering a fresh perspective on the dynamics of urban life.
Our exploration is as novel as a rare first edition, as we leverage empirical data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Environmental Protection Agency to analyze the correlation between household book expenditures and air pollution indicators over a substantial timeframe. Our statistical approach, akin to a sleuth solving a mystery, endeavors to unravel the nuances of this relationship, consolidating quantitative evidence to untangle the narrative strands between literary pursuits and atmospheric conditions.
The importance of this investigation cannot be overstated, and neither can a good book. Just as a compelling narrative captivates its readers, our findings seek to captivate the academic community and public alike, emphasizing the significance of considering unconventional factors in environmental analyses. With each surprising twist and turn in our results, we aim to stimulate further research inquiries and inspire future studies to delve deeper into the interconnected tales of consumer behavior and environmental impacts.
In the pursuit of scientific inquiry, we must remain as open-minded as a well-read book: willing to explore unexpected connections and embrace the unforeseen correlations that hide within the pages of seemingly unrelated variables. As we embark on this scholarly endeavor, let us remember the enduring wisdom of Mark Twain, who aptly remarked, "To get the full value of joy, you must have someone to divide it with." In a similar vein, to fully appreciate the findings of this research, we invite fellow academics and enthusiasts to join us in uncovering the shared story of book sales and air pollution - a tale that promises to intrigue and surprise, much like a well-crafted punchline.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our investigation unearthed a striking correlation between household spending on books and air pollution levels in New Haven, Connecticut. With a correlation coefficient of 0.9024174, our findings revealed a robust and significant relationship between these seemingly incongruous variables. This correlation coefficient, akin to a well-worn bookmark, effectively guides us through the compelling narrative of the intertwined tale of book sales and air pollution. The r-squared value of 0.8143571 underscores the strength of this connection, solidifying the bond between literary indulgence and atmospheric quality.
Fig. 1 showcases a scatterplot, vividly illustrating the strong correlation between household expenditures on books and air pollution levels. The data points dance across the plot like characters in a well-written novel, weaving a compelling story of their interconnectedness.
As we unraveled this unexpected connection, we couldn't help but reflect on a fitting dad joke: "Why did the reading lamp go to therapy? It had too many issues!" Just as this pun brings a smile, our research findings offer an unexpected twist in the understanding of environmental dynamics, emphasizing the importance of delving into unexplored relationships between human behavior and ecological outcomes.
The statistically significant p-value below 0.01 further underscores the credibility and reliability of our findings, providing compelling evidence that the link between household book spending and air pollution is not attributable to mere chance. Our research has cast a spotlight on the untold narrative between literary engagement and atmospheric conditions, challenging conventional wisdom and stimulating further inquiry into the unexpected connections that enrich our understanding of urban environments.
In light of these remarkable results, we are reminded of the enduring wisdom of a well-loved book: "You cannot open a book without learning something new," remarked by Confucius. In a similar vein, our research has unveiled a captivating story hidden within the folds of everyday consumer behavior and environmental repercussions, illuminating a previously undiscovered chapter in the chronicles of urban dynamics. This study serves as a testament to the captivating nature of research and the intriguing tales that await discovery within the most unlikely of correlations.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our research has illuminated a compelling relationship between household spending on books and air pollution in New Haven, Connecticut, akin to the gripping plot of a well-crafted mystery novel. The robust correlation coefficient of 0.9024174 and the statistically significant p-value below 0.01 have shed light on the hidden narrative intertwining literary indulgence and atmospheric quality, much like a surprising twist in the last chapter.

Fig. 1, akin to a visually captivating book cover, vividly portrays the strong correlation between the purchase of books and air pollution levels, painting a tale of unexpected interconnectedness amidst the data points. As we marveled at this unexpected correlation, we couldn't help but contemplate a fitting dad joke: "Why do bookworms never get in trouble? Because they always know how to "worm" their way out of it!" Just as this pun brings a smile, our findings offer an unexpected twist in the understanding of environmental dynamics, illustrating the depth and richness of intertwined human behavior and ecological outcomes.

With the strength of our results and the humor that permeates our writing, we assert that no further research is needed in this area.


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 The Tale of Yale: The Link Between Book Sale and Air Pollution Prevail. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Ecological Economics and Epidemiology


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 The Tale of Yale: The Link Between Book Sale and Air Pollution Prevail. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for Literature and Environmental Health Integration


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 The Tale of Yale: The Link Between Book Sale and Air Pollution Prevail with an abstract of This study delves into the intriguing relationship between household spending on books and air pollution in New Haven, Connecticut. Drawing data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Environmental Protection Agency, we quantitatively evaluated the connection between these seemingly disparate variables. Our findings revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9024174 and a statistically significant p-value below 0.01, indicating a robust relationship between the two factors over the period from 2000 to 2022.
With as much fervor as a book lover searching for the perfect reading spot, our team set out to unravel this quizzical puzzle. Through rigorous statistical analysis, we uncovered a connection as clear as a well-written plot twist. Just as a book's conclusion ties up loose ends, our findings intricately linked household spending on books to air pollution levels, leaving us breathless from the unexpected twist in the narrative.
In discussing our results, we couldn't help but ponder: "Why don't books ever get cold?" Because they have so many "covers"! Despite the laughter-inducing dad joke, our research highlights the importance of considering non-traditional factors when examining environmental phenomena. This study encourages further exploration of the complex web of interactions between human behavior and environmental outcomes, and we hope it motivates future researchers to dive into similarly unexpected connections.

ChatGPT:

book sale, air pollution, household spending, New Haven, Connecticut, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Environmental Protection Agency, correlation coefficient, statistical significance, 2000-2022, statistical analysis, environmental phenomena, human behavior, unexpected connections

*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

US household spending on books
Detailed data title: Annual US household spend on books, as a percentage of total household spend
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics
See what else correlates with US household spending on books

Air pollution in New Haven, Connecticut
Detailed data title: Percentage of days with moderate or worse air quality in New Haven-Milford, CT
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
See what else correlates with Air pollution in New Haven, Connecticut

Correlation r = 0.9024174 (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 = 0.8143571 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 81.4% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Air pollution in New Haven, Connecticut) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., US household spending on books) over the 23 years from 2000 through 2022.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 4.0E-9. 0.0000000039551761848314260000
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 0.9 in 4.0E-7% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 252,833,238 random variables You don't actually need 252 million variables to find a correlation like this one. I don't have that many variables in my database. You can also correlate variables that are not independent. I do this a lot.

p-value calculations are useful for understanding the probability of a result happening by chance. They are most useful when used to highlight the risk of a fluke outcome. For example, if you calculate a p-value of 0.30, the risk that the result is a fluke is high. It is good to know that! But there are lots of ways to get a p-value of less than 0.01, as evidenced by this project.

In this particular case, the values are so extreme as to be meaningless. That's why no one reports p-values with specificity after they drop below 0.01.

Just to be clear: I'm being completely transparent about the calculations. There is no math trickery. This is just how statistics shakes out when you calculate hundreds of millions of random correlations.
with the same 22 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 22 because we have two variables measured over a period of 23 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.

[ 0.78, 0.96 ] 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.
20002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022
US household spending on books (Household spend)0.3837560.3567990.3417160.3111450.2995740.2714990.2417360.2377210.2297670.2241830.2078610.2313650.2118890.1996090.1925410.2036510.2058940.183150.1764010.1459480.1858680.1703320.160346
Air pollution in New Haven, Connecticut (Bad air quality days)60.109370.958964.931568.219265.027350.41144.383640.27441.803330.41131.868135.068542.62350.13733.424739.72630.054621.369924.383623.287727.322423.013726.5753




Why this works

  1. 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.
  2. Lack of causal connection: There is probably Because these pages are automatically generated, it's possible that the two variables you are viewing are in fact causually related. I take steps to prevent the obvious ones from showing on the site (I don't let data about the weather in one city correlate with the weather in a neighboring city, for example), but sometimes they still pop up. If they are related, cool! You found a loophole.
    no direct connection between these variables, despite what the AI says above. This is exacerbated by the fact that I used "Years" as the base variable. Lots of things happen in a year that are not related to each other! Most studies would use something like "one person" in stead of "one year" to be the "thing" studied.
  3. Observations not independent: For many variables, sequential years are not independent of each other. If a population of people is continuously doing something every day, there is no reason to think they would suddenly change how they are doing that thing on January 1. A simple Personally I don't find any p-value calculation to be 'simple,' but you know what I mean.
    p-value calculation does not take this into account, so mathematically it appears less probable than it really is.




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([0.383756,0.356799,0.341716,0.311145,0.299574,0.271499,0.241736,0.237721,0.229767,0.224183,0.207861,0.231365,0.211889,0.199609,0.192541,0.203651,0.205894,0.18315,0.176401,0.145948,0.185868,0.170332,0.160346,])
array_2 = np.array([60.1093,70.9589,64.9315,68.2192,65.0273,50.411,44.3836,40.274,41.8033,30.411,31.8681,35.0685,42.623,50.137,33.4247,39.726,30.0546,21.3699,24.3836,23.2877,27.3224,23.0137,26.5753,])
array_1_name = "US household spending on books"
array_2_name = "Air pollution in New Haven, Connecticut"

# Perform the calculation
print(f"Calculating the correlation between {array_1_name} and {array_2_name}...")
correlation, r_squared, p_value = calculate_correlation(array_1, array_2)

# Print the results
print("Correlation Coefficient:", correlation)
print("R-squared:", r_squared)
print("P-value:", p_value)



Reuseable content

You may re-use the images on this page for any purpose, even commercial purposes, without asking for permission. The only requirement is that you attribute Tyler Vigen. Attribution can take many different forms. If you leave the "tylervigen.com" link in the image, that satisfies it just fine. If you remove it and move it to a footnote, that's fine too. You can also just write "Charts courtesy of Tyler Vigen" at the bottom of an article.

You do not need to attribute "the spurious correlations website," and you don't even need to link here if you don't want to. I don't gain anything from pageviews. There are no ads on this site, there is nothing for sale, and I am not for hire.

For the record, I am just one person. Tyler Vigen, he/him/his. I do have degrees, but they should not go after my name unless you want to annoy my wife. If that is your goal, then go ahead and cite me as "Tyler Vigen, A.A. A.A.S. B.A. J.D." Otherwise it is just "Tyler Vigen."

When spoken, my last name is pronounced "vegan," like I don't eat meat.

Full license details.
For more on re-use permissions, or to get a signed release form, see tylervigen.com/permission.

Download images for these variables:


View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

You're a rater extraordinaire!


Correlation ID: 5552 · Black Variable ID: 20000 · Red Variable ID: 20965
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0