about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #5,675 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is GMO use in cotton and the second variable is The average number of likes on The Game Theorists YouTube videos.  The chart goes from 2009 to 2022, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

The genetically modified cotton plants have developed a secret algorithm for engaging content, thus leading to a viral surge in The Game Theorists' videos. Remember, a like for cotton is a like for quality gaming analysis!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image where in a vast cotton field, genetically modified cotton plants with vibrant white cotton buds grow tall and proud. Among the rows, giant computer screens sprout from the ground, displaying The Game Theorists' YouTube channel. The videos on the screens burst with likes, each one glowing bright like a beacon of approval. The cotton plants seem to sway in delight, as if celebrating their newfound friendship with the gaming community. Let the colors pop and the interaction between the plants and screens feel dynamic. 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: GMO use in cotton and The average number of likes on The Game Theorists YouTube videos. Given these, which of the following image style descriptions seems most appropriate? Pick the one that seems to be related to one of the variables at hand. Please respond with only one of the following potential descriptions: Scalar art a funny image you would see on reddit Cutsy graphics A TIME magazine cover image Realistic
ChatGPT: A TIME magazine cover image

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 GMO use in cotton and The average number of likes on The Game Theorists YouTube videos, in the following situation: The genetically modified cotton plants have developed a secret algorithm for engaging content, thus leading to a viral surge in The Game Theorists' videos. Remember, a like for cotton is a like for quality gaming analysis!. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a cotton field, tall and lush genetically modified cotton plants stand proudly, bearing vibrant white cotton buds. Among the rows, giant computer screens sprout from the ground, displaying The Game Theorists' YouTube channel. The videos on the screens are exploding with likes, each one glowing brightly like a beacon of approval. The cotton plants seem to sway in delight, as if celebrating their newfound friendship with the gaming community.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You write and improve image generation prompts for DALLE-3. You maintain the same subjects, but enhance the visuals.
User prompt: Please respond with an image generation prompt that would be likely to create an interesting visual using DALLE-3, using the following style: [ A TIME magazine cover image ] and depicting this scene: In a cotton field, tall and lush genetically modified cotton plants stand proudly, bearing vibrant white cotton buds. Among the rows, giant computer screens sprout from the ground, displaying The Game Theorists' YouTube channel. The videos on the screens are exploding with likes, each one glowing brightly like a beacon of approval. The cotton plants seem to sway in delight, as if celebrating their newfound friendship with the gaming community. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image where in a vast cotton field, genetically modified cotton plants with vibrant white cotton buds grow tall and proud. Among the rows, giant computer screens sprout from the ground, displaying The Game Theorists' YouTube channel. The videos on the screens burst with likes, each one glowing bright like a beacon of approval. The cotton plants seem to sway in delight, as if celebrating their newfound friendship with the gaming community. Let the colors pop and the interaction between the plants and screens feel dynamic.

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

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

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 (fine-tuned)
System prompt: You provide humorous responses in the form of plausible sounding explanations for correlations. You assume the correlation is causative for the purpose of the explanation even if it is ridiculous. You do not chat with the user, you only reply with the causal connection explanation and nothing else.
User prompt: Please make up a funny explanation for how an increase in GMO use in cotton caused The average number of likes on The Game Theorists YouTube videos to increase.\Make it sound serious until the end.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Cottoning On: The GMO Connection to the Likes on The Game Theorists' YouTube Videos

The Journal of Genetically Modified Oddities

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 silly researcher writing an academic paper.You write titles and abstracts of goofy academic research papers.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, and add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton and The average number of likes on The Game Theorists YouTube videos. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Include a pun in the title.

Your research team used data from USDA and YouTube to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9552326 and p < 0.01 for 2009 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]]
"Cottoning On: The GMO Connection to the Likes on The Game Theorists' YouTube Videos"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we delve into the unexpected potential link between Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) used in cotton and the average number of likes on The Game Theorists' YouTube videos. Through an analysis of data from the USDA and YouTube, we uncovered an intriguing correlation coefficient of 0.9552326 and p < 0.01 for the years 2009 to 2022. We discuss the possibilities and implications of this curious correlation, making puns about "liking" the potential for "growing" knowledge, and how this research "seeds" new questions in the world of agricultural and digital influence.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly researcher writing an academic paper.You draft the introduction section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton and The average number of likes on The Game Theorists YouTube videos. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Cottoning On: The GMO Connection to the Likes on The Game Theorists' YouTube Videos"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we delve into the unexpected potential link between Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) used in cotton and the average number of likes on The Game Theorists' YouTube videos. Through an analysis of data from the USDA and YouTube, we uncovered an intriguing correlation coefficient of 0.9552326 and p < 0.01 for the years 2009 to 2022. We discuss the possibilities and implications of this curious correlation, making puns about "liking" the potential for "growing" knowledge, and how this research "seeds" new questions in the world of agricultural and digital influence.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
As researchers, we are constantly searching for correlations in the most unlikely of places, much like trying to find a needle in a haystack, or a genetically modified organism in a field of cotton. And while we may not have found that elusive needle, we have stumbled upon something equally as unexpected – a potential connection between the use of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) in cotton and the average number of likes on The Game Theorists' YouTube videos.

The world of science is full of surprises, and this peculiar correlation has certainly raised more than a few eyebrows among our peers. It's as if statistics and puns have collided in a bizarre experiment, producing a result that has left us scratching our heads and offering a round of applause to the unpredictability of research.

In this paper, we embark on a journey that takes us from the fields of agricultural science to the digital realm of social media influence, exploring the intertwining threads that connect GMO cotton with the virtual thumbs-up of YouTube viewers. It's a bit like planting the seeds of statistical inquiry and waiting to see what curious crop of knowledge will sprout forth.

So buckle up, dear reader, as we navigate through this scientific rollercoaster, where genetic modification meets digital appreciation, and where our pun game is as strong as our data analysis.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly researcher writing an academic paper.You draft a literature review section of an academic research paper, that starts out dry for the first few sentences but then becomes hilarious and goofy.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton and The average number of likes on The Game Theorists YouTube videos. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

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

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Perhaps you also got inspiration from some board games that are vaugely related.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Cottoning On: The GMO Connection to the Likes on The Game Theorists' YouTube Videos"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we delve into the unexpected potential link between Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) used in cotton and the average number of likes on The Game Theorists' YouTube videos. Through an analysis of data from the USDA and YouTube, we uncovered an intriguing correlation coefficient of 0.9552326 and p < 0.01 for the years 2009 to 2022. We discuss the possibilities and implications of this curious correlation, making puns about "liking" the potential for "growing" knowledge, and how this research "seeds" new questions in the world of agricultural and digital influence.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
As researchers, we are constantly searching for correlations in the most unlikely of places, much like trying to find a needle in a haystack, or a genetically modified organism in a field of cotton. And while we may not have found that elusive needle, we have stumbled upon something equally as unexpected – a potential connection between the use of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) in cotton and the average number of likes on The Game Theorists' YouTube videos.
The world of science is full of surprises, and this peculiar correlation has certainly raised more than a few eyebrows among our peers. It's as if statistics and puns have collided in a bizarre experiment, producing a result that has left us scratching our heads and offering a round of applause to the unpredictability of research.
In this paper, we embark on a journey that takes us from the fields of agricultural science to the digital realm of social media influence, exploring the intertwining threads that connect GMO cotton with the virtual thumbs-up of YouTube viewers. It's a bit like planting the seeds of statistical inquiry and waiting to see what curious crop of knowledge will sprout forth.
So buckle up, dear reader, as we navigate through this scientific rollercoaster, where genetic modification meets digital appreciation, and where our pun game is as strong as our data analysis.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The potential link between the use of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) in cotton and the average number of likes on The Game Theorists' YouTube videos has raised eyebrows and skepticisms alike. Smith et al. in "The Impact of GMO Cotton on Agricultural Yields" found significant evidence supporting the notion that GMO cotton can lead to increased crop yields. Meanwhile, Doe et al. in "Digital Engagement Trends in Online Video Content" highlighted the growing influence of social media platforms in stimulating user engagement with online content.

However, as we dig deeper into this eccentric inquiry, our expedition through the academic jungle leads us to some unexpected destinations. In "Cotton: The Fabric of Our Lives," Jones unravels the storied history of cotton production and its impact on the world economy, offering a thread of insight into our tangled web of inquiry.

Furthermore, fictional works such as "The Cotton Chronicles" by Literary Luminary and "The GMO Gambit" by Novel Namer seem to blur the lines between reality and fantasy, leaving us with more questions than answers. It's as if our research has become a game of Clue, where every piece of evidence leads to a twist in the plot, much like navigating a game of Botanists & Bioengineers: The Showdown.

As we navigate this labyrinth of potential connections, it's clear that we are treading into uncharted territories. Much like a game of Twister, where the rules of engagement are uncertain, our research has twisted and turned into a colorful display of curiosity and wonder. So, let's roll the dice and see where this GMO cotton connection leads us next!


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly researcher writing an academic paper.You draft the methodology section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton and The average number of likes on The Game Theorists YouTube videos. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from USDA and YouTube . You used data from 2009 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]]
"Cottoning On: The GMO Connection to the Likes on The Game Theorists' YouTube Videos"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we delve into the unexpected potential link between Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) used in cotton and the average number of likes on The Game Theorists' YouTube videos. Through an analysis of data from the USDA and YouTube, we uncovered an intriguing correlation coefficient of 0.9552326 and p < 0.01 for the years 2009 to 2022. We discuss the possibilities and implications of this curious correlation, making puns about "liking" the potential for "growing" knowledge, and how this research "seeds" new questions in the world of agricultural and digital influence.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
As researchers, we are constantly searching for correlations in the most unlikely of places, much like trying to find a needle in a haystack, or a genetically modified organism in a field of cotton. And while we may not have found that elusive needle, we have stumbled upon something equally as unexpected – a potential connection between the use of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) in cotton and the average number of likes on The Game Theorists' YouTube videos.
The world of science is full of surprises, and this peculiar correlation has certainly raised more than a few eyebrows among our peers. It's as if statistics and puns have collided in a bizarre experiment, producing a result that has left us scratching our heads and offering a round of applause to the unpredictability of research.
In this paper, we embark on a journey that takes us from the fields of agricultural science to the digital realm of social media influence, exploring the intertwining threads that connect GMO cotton with the virtual thumbs-up of YouTube viewers. It's a bit like planting the seeds of statistical inquiry and waiting to see what curious crop of knowledge will sprout forth.
So buckle up, dear reader, as we navigate through this scientific rollercoaster, where genetic modification meets digital appreciation, and where our pun game is as strong as our data analysis.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To investigate the potential connection between GMO use in cotton and the average number of likes on The Game Theorists' YouTube videos, we utilized a blend of traditional statistical methods and a dash of unconventional approaches that may or may not involve watching countless hours of YouTube videos in the name of "research."

Data Collection:
Our data were harvested from the USDA database, where we dug through the proverbial fields of information on cotton production and GMO usage. We then waded into the digital jungle of YouTube, where we harvested video analytics and engagement metrics from The Game Theorists' channel. It was a bit like foraging for statistical berries, finding the ripest data to pluck and examine.

Time Frame:
We gathered data spanning from 2009 to 2022, casting our net wide to capture the nuances of changing agricultural practices and the dynamic landscape of online engagement. This allowed us to observe trends and patterns over a substantial period, like watching a virtual cauliflower grow from a tiny statistical seed to a fully bloomed correlation.

Statistical Analysis:
Our analysis involved more than just number-crunching; it required a keen eye for detail and a willingness to embrace the unexpected. We performed correlation analyses to measure the relationship between GMO cotton use and YouTube likes, all while trying to resist the temptation to make cotton-themed puns in our statistical software.

Additionally, we implemented a novel approach we affectionately dubbed the "GMO-tivation Model," which involved drawing colorful diagrams resembling crop circles to visualize the interconnectedness between agricultural practices and online engagement. Although it may sound a bit far-fetched, the results were anything but haywire – much like the precise cultivation of statistical insight in a field of data.

Ethical Considerations:
Given the diverse sources of our data, it was crucial to ensure the ethical acquisition and usage of information. We meticulously examined data integrity, bias, and the reliability of our sources, all while resisting the urge to create a statistical masterpiece that would make even the most skeptical peer reviewer smile (which would be a remarkable feat).

In summary, our methodology blended the rigors of scientific inquiry with a pinch of whimsy and a truckload of statistical rigor to unearth the potential correlation between GMO cotton and digital appreciation. It was a journey filled with both data-driven precision and a healthy dose of levity, not unlike finding the perfect statistical fertilizer to grow our research into a bountiful contribution to the scientific field.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly researcher writing an academic paper.You draft the results section of an academic research paper. You speak in the past tense (you found...).
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton and The average number of likes on The Game Theorists YouTube videos. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from USDA and YouTube .

For the time period 2009 to 2022, you found a correlation 0.9552326, r-squared of 0.9124694, 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]]
"Cottoning On: The GMO Connection to the Likes on The Game Theorists' YouTube Videos"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we delve into the unexpected potential link between Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) used in cotton and the average number of likes on The Game Theorists' YouTube videos. Through an analysis of data from the USDA and YouTube, we uncovered an intriguing correlation coefficient of 0.9552326 and p < 0.01 for the years 2009 to 2022. We discuss the possibilities and implications of this curious correlation, making puns about "liking" the potential for "growing" knowledge, and how this research "seeds" new questions in the world of agricultural and digital influence.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
As researchers, we are constantly searching for correlations in the most unlikely of places, much like trying to find a needle in a haystack, or a genetically modified organism in a field of cotton. And while we may not have found that elusive needle, we have stumbled upon something equally as unexpected – a potential connection between the use of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) in cotton and the average number of likes on The Game Theorists' YouTube videos.
The world of science is full of surprises, and this peculiar correlation has certainly raised more than a few eyebrows among our peers. It's as if statistics and puns have collided in a bizarre experiment, producing a result that has left us scratching our heads and offering a round of applause to the unpredictability of research.
In this paper, we embark on a journey that takes us from the fields of agricultural science to the digital realm of social media influence, exploring the intertwining threads that connect GMO cotton with the virtual thumbs-up of YouTube viewers. It's a bit like planting the seeds of statistical inquiry and waiting to see what curious crop of knowledge will sprout forth.
So buckle up, dear reader, as we navigate through this scientific rollercoaster, where genetic modification meets digital appreciation, and where our pun game is as strong as our data analysis.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The data analysis revealed a remarkable correlation between the use of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) in cotton and the average number of likes on The Game Theorists' YouTube videos. The correlation coefficient of 0.9552326 indicates a strong positive relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables. This finding suggests that as the adoption of GMO in cotton increased, so too did the number of likes received by The Game Theorists on their YouTube videos. It's like the seeds of GMO cotton were inadvertently sowing the seeds of digital approval, cultivating an unexpected harvest of online appreciation.

The r-squared value of 0.9124694 further reinforces the strength of the relationship, explaining over 91% of the variance in The Game Theorists' likes solely based on GMO cotton usage. This suggests that the variability in YouTube likes can be attributed to the changes in GMO cotton cultivation. Who would have thought that statistical predictability could sprout from the fields of agriculture and ripen into digital influence?

The p-value of less than 0.01 indicates that the observed correlation is statistically significant, providing strong evidence against the null hypothesis of no relationship between GMO cotton and YouTube likes. It seems the odds of this connection being purely coincidental are lower than finding a non-GMO needle in a biotechnological haystack!

The scatterplot (Fig. 1) visually depicts the tight clustering of data points, illustrating the striking alignment between GMO cotton usage and The Game Theorists' likes. It's as if each data point is a blooming cotton boll, bursting with likes instead of fibers, demonstrating the close association between these two variables.

This intriguing correlation challenges our understanding of the reach and impact of GMOs, not just in the agricultural domain but also in the digital landscape. It's a bit like discovering that the fertilizers used to nourish the cotton plants have inadvertently fertilized The Game Theorists' online presence as well. This unexpected connection brings a whole new meaning to the concept of "growing" influence!

In conclusion, this study has unearthed a statistically robust link between GMO cotton and The Game Theorists' YouTube likes, sparking new discussions and inquiries at the intersection of biotechnology and digital media. Our findings raise fascinating questions about the broader implications of GMOs and their unforeseen influence, proving that in the world of research, unexpected connections can bloom in the most surprising of places.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly researcher writing an academic paper.You draft the discussion section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton and The average number of likes on The Game Theorists YouTube videos. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Limit your response to 500 tokens.

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

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

[[TITLE]]
"Cottoning On: The GMO Connection to the Likes on The Game Theorists' YouTube Videos"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we delve into the unexpected potential link between Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) used in cotton and the average number of likes on The Game Theorists' YouTube videos. Through an analysis of data from the USDA and YouTube, we uncovered an intriguing correlation coefficient of 0.9552326 and p < 0.01 for the years 2009 to 2022. We discuss the possibilities and implications of this curious correlation, making puns about "liking" the potential for "growing" knowledge, and how this research "seeds" new questions in the world of agricultural and digital influence.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The potential link between the use of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) in cotton and the average number of likes on The Game Theorists' YouTube videos has raised eyebrows and skepticisms alike. Smith et al. in "The Impact of GMO Cotton on Agricultural Yields" found significant evidence supporting the notion that GMO cotton can lead to increased crop yields. Meanwhile, Doe et al. in "Digital Engagement Trends in Online Video Content" highlighted the growing influence of social media platforms in stimulating user engagement with online content.
However, as we dig deeper into this eccentric inquiry, our expedition through the academic jungle leads us to some unexpected destinations. In "Cotton: The Fabric of Our Lives," Jones unravels the storied history of cotton production and its impact on the world economy, offering a thread of insight into our tangled web of inquiry.
Furthermore, fictional works such as "The Cotton Chronicles" by Literary Luminary and "The GMO Gambit" by Novel Namer seem to blur the lines between reality and fantasy, leaving us with more questions than answers. It's as if our research has become a game of Clue, where every piece of evidence leads to a twist in the plot, much like navigating a game of Botanists & Bioengineers: The Showdown.
As we navigate this labyrinth of potential connections, it's clear that we are treading into uncharted territories. Much like a game of Twister, where the rules of engagement are uncertain, our research has twisted and turned into a colorful display of curiosity and wonder. So, let's roll the dice and see where this GMO cotton connection leads us next!

[[RESULTS]]
The data analysis revealed a remarkable correlation between the use of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) in cotton and the average number of likes on The Game Theorists' YouTube videos. The correlation coefficient of 0.9552326 indicates a strong positive relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables. This finding suggests that as the adoption of GMO in cotton increased, so too did the number of likes received by The Game Theorists on their YouTube videos. It's like the seeds of GMO cotton were inadvertently sowing the seeds of digital approval, cultivating an unexpected harvest of online appreciation.
The r-squared value of 0.9124694 further reinforces the strength of the relationship, explaining over 91% of the variance in The Game Theorists' likes solely based on GMO cotton usage. This suggests that the variability in YouTube likes can be attributed to the changes in GMO cotton cultivation. Who would have thought that statistical predictability could sprout from the fields of agriculture and ripen into digital influence?
The p-value of less than 0.01 indicates that the observed correlation is statistically significant, providing strong evidence against the null hypothesis of no relationship between GMO cotton and YouTube likes. It seems the odds of this connection being purely coincidental are lower than finding a non-GMO needle in a biotechnological haystack!
The scatterplot (Fig. 1) visually depicts the tight clustering of data points, illustrating the striking alignment between GMO cotton usage and The Game Theorists' likes. It's as if each data point is a blooming cotton boll, bursting with likes instead of fibers, demonstrating the close association between these two variables.
This intriguing correlation challenges our understanding of the reach and impact of GMOs, not just in the agricultural domain but also in the digital landscape. It's a bit like discovering that the fertilizers used to nourish the cotton plants have inadvertently fertilized The Game Theorists' online presence as well. This unexpected connection brings a whole new meaning to the concept of "growing" influence!
In conclusion, this study has unearthed a statistically robust link between GMO cotton and The Game Theorists' YouTube likes, sparking new discussions and inquiries at the intersection of biotechnology and digital media. Our findings raise fascinating questions about the broader implications of GMOs and their unforeseen influence, proving that in the world of research, unexpected connections can bloom in the most surprising of places.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

Ah, here we are at the "discussion" part of our whimsical romp through peculiar research findings. Like Alice tumbling into Wonderland, our journey through the data has led us down a rabbit hole of unexpected connections and delightfully confounding correlations.

Our results have lent support to the prior research of Smith et al., who showcased the positive impact of GMO cotton on agricultural yields. It seems that the genetically modified seeds not only sprouted higher crop production but also sowed the seeds of digital engagement. It's as if the cotton fields were singing a siren's song, luring in YouTube users to click that 'like' button with unyielding enthusiasm.

Furthermore, our findings corroborate the work of Doe et al., who highlighted the growing influence of social media platforms in stimulating user engagement with online content. The tendrils of GMO cotton seem to have intertwined themselves into the fabric of online engagement, weaving an intricate web of statistical significance that even the finest spider silk would envy.

As we peel back the layers of this onion, we can't help but marvel at the unexpected destinations our research has taken us, akin to Columbus setting sail to discover new lands and stumbling upon a treasure trove of likes. It's almost as if our investigation has transformed into a game of "Where's Waldo?", with each data point giving us a cheeky wink, as if to say, "You've found me, but can you find the next one?"

The tight clustering of data points in the scatterplot (Fig. 1) resembles a field of cotton blooms, bursting forth with likes instead of fibers. This visual representation underscores the close association between GMO cotton usage and The Game Theorists' likes, painting a picture more colorful than a field of wildflowers in full bloom.

In our journey through this peculiar inquiry, we've trotted across the fertile fields of statistical predictability, only to stumble upon a cornucopia of surprises and delights. It's as if the universe itself is playing a cosmic joke on us, whispering in our ears, "You never know where the next statistical connection will sprout."

In the grand tapestry of research, it's the unexpected threads that often lead to the most mesmerizing patterns. And in the case of our study, the threads of GMO cotton have woven a beguiling tale of digital influence and agricultural intrigue. As we continue to unravel this enigma, let us remain ever open to the unexpected, for who knows what other whimsical connections might be lurking in the corridors of statistical analysis?

This study has certainly sparked new discussions and inquiries at the intersection of biotechnology and digital media, leaving us with a sense of wonder and curiosity akin to that of a child discovering a hidden treasure map in a dusty old attic. Our findings serve as a delightful reminder that in the world of research, it's often the most peculiar and seemingly unrelated variables that hold the key to unlocking the mysteries of the universe.

And with that, let us embark on the next expedition, armed with our statistical compass and a hearty sense of humor, ready to unearth the next hidden connection and revel in the joy of discovery. After all, in the words of Eureka, the revered muse of scientific insight, "The most profound discoveries often hide behind the mask of the absurd."


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

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton and The average number of likes on The Game Theorists YouTube videos. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

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

Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
"Cottoning On: The GMO Connection to the Likes on The Game Theorists' YouTube Videos"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we delve into the unexpected potential link between Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) used in cotton and the average number of likes on The Game Theorists' YouTube videos. Through an analysis of data from the USDA and YouTube, we uncovered an intriguing correlation coefficient of 0.9552326 and p < 0.01 for the years 2009 to 2022. We discuss the possibilities and implications of this curious correlation, making puns about "liking" the potential for "growing" knowledge, and how this research "seeds" new questions in the world of agricultural and digital influence.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
As researchers, we are constantly searching for correlations in the most unlikely of places, much like trying to find a needle in a haystack, or a genetically modified organism in a field of cotton. And while we may not have found that elusive needle, we have stumbled upon something equally as unexpected – a potential connection between the use of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) in cotton and the average number of likes on The Game Theorists' YouTube videos.
The world of science is full of surprises, and this peculiar correlation has certainly raised more than a few eyebrows among our peers. It's as if statistics and puns have collided in a bizarre experiment, producing a result that has left us scratching our heads and offering a round of applause to the unpredictability of research.
In this paper, we embark on a journey that takes us from the fields of agricultural science to the digital realm of social media influence, exploring the intertwining threads that connect GMO cotton with the virtual thumbs-up of YouTube viewers. It's a bit like planting the seeds of statistical inquiry and waiting to see what curious crop of knowledge will sprout forth.
So buckle up, dear reader, as we navigate through this scientific rollercoaster, where genetic modification meets digital appreciation, and where our pun game is as strong as our data analysis.

[[RESULTS]]
The data analysis revealed a remarkable correlation between the use of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) in cotton and the average number of likes on The Game Theorists' YouTube videos. The correlation coefficient of 0.9552326 indicates a strong positive relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables. This finding suggests that as the adoption of GMO in cotton increased, so too did the number of likes received by The Game Theorists on their YouTube videos. It's like the seeds of GMO cotton were inadvertently sowing the seeds of digital approval, cultivating an unexpected harvest of online appreciation.
The r-squared value of 0.9124694 further reinforces the strength of the relationship, explaining over 91% of the variance in The Game Theorists' likes solely based on GMO cotton usage. This suggests that the variability in YouTube likes can be attributed to the changes in GMO cotton cultivation. Who would have thought that statistical predictability could sprout from the fields of agriculture and ripen into digital influence?
The p-value of less than 0.01 indicates that the observed correlation is statistically significant, providing strong evidence against the null hypothesis of no relationship between GMO cotton and YouTube likes. It seems the odds of this connection being purely coincidental are lower than finding a non-GMO needle in a biotechnological haystack!
The scatterplot (Fig. 1) visually depicts the tight clustering of data points, illustrating the striking alignment between GMO cotton usage and The Game Theorists' likes. It's as if each data point is a blooming cotton boll, bursting with likes instead of fibers, demonstrating the close association between these two variables.
This intriguing correlation challenges our understanding of the reach and impact of GMOs, not just in the agricultural domain but also in the digital landscape. It's a bit like discovering that the fertilizers used to nourish the cotton plants have inadvertently fertilized The Game Theorists' online presence as well. This unexpected connection brings a whole new meaning to the concept of "growing" influence!
In conclusion, this study has unearthed a statistically robust link between GMO cotton and The Game Theorists' YouTube likes, sparking new discussions and inquiries at the intersection of biotechnology and digital media. Our findings raise fascinating questions about the broader implications of GMOs and their unforeseen influence, proving that in the world of research, unexpected connections can bloom in the most surprising of places.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In the world of statistical analysis, it seems that the seeds of curiosity can sprout into the most unexpected and entertaining findings. Our study has shed light on an unlikely connection between the cultivation of GMO cotton and the digital appreciation showered upon The Game Theorists' YouTube videos. It's as if we've stumbled upon a secret recipe for online success, mixing biotechnological innovation with digital engagement and uncovering a statistical fusion that even our pun-loving selves couldn't have imagined.

The correlation coefficient of 0.9552326 has shown us that when it comes to YouTube likes, GMO cotton is like the ultimate social media influencer – silently shaping the digital landscape from the agricultural fields. And with an r-squared value of 0.9124694, we can confidently say that over 91% of the variation in Game Theorists' likes can be explained by the whims of genetically modified cotton. It's almost like the cotton plants themselves are casting votes of approval on the videos, chanting "GMO, GMO, GMO!" in their own vegetative language.

The p-value of less than 0.01 has provided us with the strongest statistical evidence since that one time we tried to prove that "correlation" and "causation" are actually the same thing (spoiler alert: they're not). You could say the probability of this connection being a mere coincidence is as rare as finding a truly organic, non-GMO unicorn prancing through the fields of statistical significance.

And let's not forget our scatterplot (Fig. 1), where each data point is like a little like-hungry cotton boll, curiously peeking out from the graph and attempting to break the fourth wall of statistical representation. It's a visual testament to the unexpected harmony between GMO cotton and digital appreciation, as if each data point is a tiny testimonial to the power of genetically modified influence.

So, as we come to the end of this academic rollercoaster ride, it's safe to say that our groundbreaking findings have grown into something truly unique. In the world of research, as in agriculture, there are always surprises waiting to sprout forth from the soil of inquiry, and this study has certainly tilled a fertile ground for future investigations. However, as much as we'd love to continue down this statistically whimsical path, we're confident in asserting that no further research is needed in this area. It's time to move on to the next unexpected combination of variables, leaving the GMO cotton and YouTube likes to bask in their own peculiar spotlight.


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 Cottoning On: The GMO Connection to the Likes on The Game Theorists' YouTube Videos. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Genetically Modified Oddities


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 Cottoning On: The GMO Connection to the Likes on The Game Theorists' YouTube Videos. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for Gastronomical Genetics and Memetic Studies


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 Cottoning On: The GMO Connection to the Likes on The Game Theorists' YouTube Videos with an abstract of In this paper, we delve into the unexpected potential link between Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) used in cotton and the average number of likes on The Game Theorists' YouTube videos. Through an analysis of data from the USDA and YouTube, we uncovered an intriguing correlation coefficient of 0.9552326 and p < 0.01 for the years 2009 to 2022. We discuss the possibilities and implications of this curious correlation, making puns about "liking" the potential for "growing" knowledge, and how this research "seeds" new questions in the world of agricultural and digital influence.

ChatGPT:

GMO cotton, Genetically Modified Organisms cotton, cotton production, YouTube video likes, correlation coefficient, USDA data, agricultural influence, digital influence, Game Theorists, YouTube analytics, social media analytics

*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

GMO use in cotton
Detailed data title: Percent of cotton planted in the United States genetically modified with both Bt and HT
Source: USDA
See what else correlates with GMO use in cotton

The average number of likes on The Game Theorists YouTube videos
Detailed data title: The average number of likes on The Game Theorists YouTube videos.
Source: YouTube
See what else correlates with The average number of likes on The Game Theorists YouTube videos

Correlation r = 0.9552326 (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 = 0.9124694 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 91.2% of the change in the one variable (i.e., The average number of likes on The Game Theorists YouTube videos) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., GMO use in cotton) over the 14 years from 2009 through 2022.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 1.05E-7. 0.0000001054942789379095300000
The p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme. More specifically the p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme if we had only tested one pair of variables one time.

But I am a p-villain. I absolutely did not test only one pair of variables one time. I correlated hundreds of millions of pairs of variables. I threw boatloads of data into an industrial-sized blender to find this correlation.

Who is going to stop me? p-value reporting doesn't require me to report how many calculations I had to go through in order to find a low p-value!
On average, you will find a correaltion as strong as 0.96 in 1.05E-5% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 9,479,187 random variables You don't actually need 9 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 13 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 13 because we have two variables measured over a period of 14 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.

[ 0.86, 0.99 ] 95% correlation confidence interval (using the Fisher z-transformation)
The confidence interval is an estimate the range of the value of the correlation coefficient, using the correlation itself as an input. The values are meant to be the low and high end of the correlation coefficient with 95% confidence.

This one is a bit more complciated than the other calculations, but I include it because many people have been pushing for confidence intervals instead of p-value calculations (for example: NEJM. However, if you are dredging data, you can reliably find yourself in the 5%. That's my goal!


All values for the years included above: If I were being very sneaky, I could trim years from the beginning or end of the datasets to increase the correlation on some pairs of variables. I don't do that because there are already plenty of correlations in my database without monkeying with the years.

Still, sometimes one of the variables has more years of data available than the other. This page only shows the overlapping years. To see all the years, click on "See what else correlates with..." link above.
20092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022
GMO use in cotton (GMO cotton %)4858586367797980808289838886
The average number of likes on The Game Theorists YouTube videos (Average likes)3388.8810759.827595.251265.7112913164799193326137669220864220981209024226432225288230342




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.
  4. Y-axis doesn't start at zero: I truncated the Y-axes of the graph above. I also used a line graph, which makes the visual connection stand out more than it deserves. Nothing against line graphs. They are great at telling a story when you have linear data! But visually it is deceptive because the only data is at the points on the graph, not the lines on the graph. In between each point, the data could have been doing anything. Like going for a random walk by itself!
    Mathematically what I showed is true, but it is intentionally misleading. Below is the same chart but with both Y-axes starting at zero.




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([48,58,58,63,67,79,79,80,80,82,89,83,88,86,])
array_2 = np.array([3388.88,10759.8,27595.2,51265.7,112913,164799,193326,137669,220864,220981,209024,226432,225288,230342,])
array_1_name = "GMO use in cotton"
array_2_name = "The average number of likes on The Game Theorists YouTube videos"

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

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



Reuseable content

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

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

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

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

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

Download images for these variables:


View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Thanks for shining a light on this correlation!


Correlation ID: 5675 · Black Variable ID: 801 · Red Variable ID: 25719
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0