about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #5,717 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is How nerdy SciShow Space YouTube video titles are and the second variable is Number of times 6 was a winning Mega Millions number.  The chart goes from 2014 to 2020, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As the frequency of 6 being drawn in Mega Millions decreases, fewer people in the space community are mistakenly attributing it to some cosmic significance. This has led to a decrease in the nerdy speculation and, as a result, a decline in the overall nerdy level of SciShow Space video titles.

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image in the style of a humorous meme found on Reddit. Depict a scene where the title of a SciShow Space video has been changed from "6: The Cosmic Number!" to "Astronomy of Black Holes Explained." In the background, show a Mega Millions lottery result with a decreased frequency of the number 6 being drawn. The space community appears less excited about the supposed cosmic significance of the number 6. The visual should focus on creating a lighthearted and amusing representation of this scenario. 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: How nerdy SciShow Space YouTube video titles are and Number of times 6 was a winning Mega Millions number. 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: Vaporwave Cybernetic art Macabre Symbolism a funny image you would see on reddit
ChatGPT: a funny image you would see on reddit

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You describe simple visual scenes that depict the two variables stated. You combine both variables into one scene.
User prompt: Please describe a visual scene that prominently depicts both How nerdy SciShow Space YouTube video titles are and Number of times 6 was a winning Mega Millions number, in the following situation: As the frequency of 6 being drawn in Mega Millions decreases, fewer people in the space community are mistakenly attributing it to some cosmic significance. This has led to a decrease in the nerdy speculation and, as a result, a decline in the overall nerdy level of SciShow Space video titles.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In the SciShow Space video title, instead of "6: The Cosmic Number!" it now reads "Astronomy of Black Holes Explained." The Mega Millions result shows a decreased frequency of the number 6 being drawn, with less excitement in the space community about its supposed cosmic significance.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You write and improve image generation prompts for DALLE-3. You maintain the same subjects, but enhance the visuals.
User prompt: Please respond with an image generation prompt that would be likely to create an interesting visual using DALLE-3, using the following style: [ a funny image you would see on reddit ] and depicting this scene: In the SciShow Space video title, instead of "6: The Cosmic Number!" it now reads "Astronomy of Black Holes Explained." The Mega Millions result shows a decreased frequency of the number 6 being drawn, with less excitement in the space community about its supposed cosmic significance. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image in the style of a humorous meme found on Reddit. Depict a scene where the title of a SciShow Space video has been changed from "6: The Cosmic Number!" to "Astronomy of Black Holes Explained." In the background, show a Mega Millions lottery result with a decreased frequency of the number 6 being drawn. The space community appears less excited about the supposed cosmic significance of the number 6. The visual should focus on creating a lighthearted and amusing representation of this scenario.

*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 How nerdy SciShow Space YouTube video titles are caused Number of times 6 was a winning Mega Millions number to decrease.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.05)
Nerdy Notions: Navigating the Nexus between Nerdy SciShow Space YouTube Video Titles and Number of times 6 was a winning Mega Millions number

The Journal of Quirky Science Studies

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 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 How nerdy SciShow Space YouTube video titles are and Number of times 6 was a winning Mega Millions number. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Make the title an alliteration.

Your research team used data from AI analysis of YouTube video titles and NY Mega Millions Lottery to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.8022849 and p < 0.05 for 2014 to 2020.

Please respond in this format (replace "Lorem ipsum dolor sit" with your title and abstract)

[[TITLE]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit

[[ABSTRACT]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit



ChatGPT:
[[TITLE]]
Nerdy Notions: Navigating the Nexus between Nerdy SciShow Space YouTube Video Titles and Number of times 6 was a winning Mega Millions number

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study endeavors to explore the enigmatic correlation between the nerdy sci-fi inclined SciShow Space YouTube video titles and the frequency of number 6 emerging as the winning Mega Millions number. Leveraging advanced AI analysis tools, datasets spanning from 2014 to 2020 were meticulously scrutinized. The results unveiled a surprisingly robust correlation coefficient of 0.8022849 with a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.05, fostering a paradigm-shifting understanding of the interplay between seemingly disparate realms of nerdy science education and lottery outcomes. Our findings underscore the existence of a peculiar interconnectedness, prompting intriguing musings on the quirky tapestry woven by the universe of science and chance. We trust that this investigation will spark engaging discourse and tantalizing speculation within the academia and beyond.


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

Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between How nerdy SciShow Space YouTube video titles are and Number of times 6 was a winning Mega Millions number. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Nerdy Notions: Navigating the Nexus between Nerdy SciShow Space YouTube Video Titles and Number of times 6 was a winning Mega Millions number

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study endeavors to explore the enigmatic correlation between the nerdy sci-fi inclined SciShow Space YouTube video titles and the frequency of number 6 emerging as the winning Mega Millions number. Leveraging advanced AI analysis tools, datasets spanning from 2014 to 2020 were meticulously scrutinized. The results unveiled a surprisingly robust correlation coefficient of 0.8022849 with a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.05, fostering a paradigm-shifting understanding of the interplay between seemingly disparate realms of nerdy science education and lottery outcomes. Our findings underscore the existence of a peculiar interconnectedness, prompting intriguing musings on the quirky tapestry woven by the universe of science and chance. We trust that this investigation will spark engaging discourse and tantalizing speculation within the academia and beyond.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

The intersection of nerdy pop culture and statistically improbable phenomena has long been a subject of curiosity and speculation. From the elusive allure of sci-fi conventions to the fervent debates over winning lottery numbers, the enigmatic nexus between these spheres has captivated the imaginations of scholars and enthusiasts alike. In particular, the realm of online science education has witnessed a surge in popularity, with platforms such as SciShow Space captivating audiences with their erudite yet quirky video titles. Meanwhile, the Mega Millions lottery, a perennial source of hopeful anticipation and bewilderment, has offered a distinct twist to the unpredictable nature of chance.

Amidst the melding of the nerdy and the numerical, lies a peculiar conundrum that has eluded conventional reasoning. Thus, this study embarks on an endeavor to unravel the clandestine web of connections between the nerdy SciShow Space YouTube video titles and the unforeseeable emergence of number 6 as the winning Mega Millions number. Through the utilization of cutting-edge artificial intelligence tools and meticulous data scrutiny, we endeavor to illuminate the cryptic correlations that underpin this seemingly improbable relationship.

As we delve into the depths of this perplexing juxtaposition, it becomes apparent that our inquiry transcends mere statistical analysis; it delves into the whimsical interplay of chance and esoteric knowledge. Indeed, the 8022849 correlation coefficient that emerged from our investigation has startled even the most seasoned researchers, prompting us to reconsider the very fabric of causality in the universe. It is through this unconventional lens that we invite our esteemed readers to partake in our findings, tantalizingly beckoning them towards a realm where the nerdy and the numerical intertwine in curious harmony.


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

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between How nerdy SciShow Space YouTube video titles are and Number of times 6 was a winning Mega Millions number. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

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

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then name some movies that you watched that are tangentially related to the topic.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Nerdy Notions: Navigating the Nexus between Nerdy SciShow Space YouTube Video Titles and Number of times 6 was a winning Mega Millions number

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study endeavors to explore the enigmatic correlation between the nerdy sci-fi inclined SciShow Space YouTube video titles and the frequency of number 6 emerging as the winning Mega Millions number. Leveraging advanced AI analysis tools, datasets spanning from 2014 to 2020 were meticulously scrutinized. The results unveiled a surprisingly robust correlation coefficient of 0.8022849 with a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.05, fostering a paradigm-shifting understanding of the interplay between seemingly disparate realms of nerdy science education and lottery outcomes. Our findings underscore the existence of a peculiar interconnectedness, prompting intriguing musings on the quirky tapestry woven by the universe of science and chance. We trust that this investigation will spark engaging discourse and tantalizing speculation within the academia and beyond.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The intersection of nerdy pop culture and statistically improbable phenomena has long been a subject of curiosity and speculation. From the elusive allure of sci-fi conventions to the fervent debates over winning lottery numbers, the enigmatic nexus between these spheres has captivated the imaginations of scholars and enthusiasts alike. In particular, the realm of online science education has witnessed a surge in popularity, with platforms such as SciShow Space captivating audiences with their erudite yet quirky video titles. Meanwhile, the Mega Millions lottery, a perennial source of hopeful anticipation and bewilderment, has offered a distinct twist to the unpredictable nature of chance.
Amidst the melding of the nerdy and the numerical, lies a peculiar conundrum that has eluded conventional reasoning. Thus, this study embarks on an endeavor to unravel the clandestine web of connections between the nerdy SciShow Space YouTube video titles and the unforeseeable emergence of number 6 as the winning Mega Millions number. Through the utilization of cutting-edge artificial intelligence tools and meticulous data scrutiny, we endeavor to illuminate the cryptic correlations that underpin this seemingly improbable relationship.
As we delve into the depths of this perplexing juxtaposition, it becomes apparent that our inquiry transcends mere statistical analysis; it delves into the whimsical interplay of chance and esoteric knowledge. Indeed, the 8022849 correlation coefficient that emerged from our investigation has startled even the most seasoned researchers, prompting us to reconsider the very fabric of causality in the universe. It is through this unconventional lens that we invite our esteemed readers to partake in our findings, tantalizingly beckoning them towards a realm where the nerdy and the numerical intertwine in curious harmony.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

Smith et al. (2016) provide a comprehensive examination of the influence of popular culture on statistical phenomena, shedding light on the quirky interplay between seemingly unrelated domains. Similarly, Doe and Jones (2018) delve into the enigmatic world of chance and the idiosyncratic nature of random number generation, setting the stage for our investigation into the peculiar connection between nerdy SciShow Space YouTube video titles and the recurring theme of number 6 in Mega Millions lottery outcomes.

Delving deeper into the esoteric world of statistical analysis and pop culture whimsy, it is imperative to consider the relevance of non-fiction literature in shaping our understanding of these interwoven phenomena. "Freakonomics" by Levitt and Dubner (2005) presents an insightful exploration of unconventional correlations and their impact on societal paradigms, paving the way for our unconventional inquiry into the hybridity of science education and lottery fortuity.

Furthermore, the works of fiction cannot be disregarded, as they often offer poignant allegories and subtle insights into the human condition, which may inadvertently resonate with our peculiar research subject. The dystopian setting of "Brave New World" by Aldous Huxley (1932) serves as a poignant reminder of the unpredictable nature of societal constructs, providing a tangential yet thought-provoking parallel to the unpredictability of lottery outcomes.

Turning to the cinematic realm, "The Matrix" (1999) encapsulates the profound interplay of perception and reality, prompting contemplation on the underlying forces that shape seemingly disparate occurrences. While not directly related to our investigation, the allegorical underpinnings of this film beckon us to consider the enigmatic connections that permeate our world, encapsulating the essence of our quest to unravel the cryptic correlation between nerdy SciShow Space YouTube video titles and the enigmatic prominence of the number 6 in Mega Millions draws.


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

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between How nerdy SciShow Space YouTube video titles are and Number of times 6 was a winning Mega Millions number. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from AI analysis of YouTube video titles and NY Mega Millions Lottery . You used data from 2014 to 2020

Make up the research methods you don't know. Make them a bit goofy and convoluted.

Here is the title, abstract, and introduction of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Nerdy Notions: Navigating the Nexus between Nerdy SciShow Space YouTube Video Titles and Number of times 6 was a winning Mega Millions number

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study endeavors to explore the enigmatic correlation between the nerdy sci-fi inclined SciShow Space YouTube video titles and the frequency of number 6 emerging as the winning Mega Millions number. Leveraging advanced AI analysis tools, datasets spanning from 2014 to 2020 were meticulously scrutinized. The results unveiled a surprisingly robust correlation coefficient of 0.8022849 with a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.05, fostering a paradigm-shifting understanding of the interplay between seemingly disparate realms of nerdy science education and lottery outcomes. Our findings underscore the existence of a peculiar interconnectedness, prompting intriguing musings on the quirky tapestry woven by the universe of science and chance. We trust that this investigation will spark engaging discourse and tantalizing speculation within the academia and beyond.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
The intersection of nerdy pop culture and statistically improbable phenomena has long been a subject of curiosity and speculation. From the elusive allure of sci-fi conventions to the fervent debates over winning lottery numbers, the enigmatic nexus between these spheres has captivated the imaginations of scholars and enthusiasts alike. In particular, the realm of online science education has witnessed a surge in popularity, with platforms such as SciShow Space captivating audiences with their erudite yet quirky video titles. Meanwhile, the Mega Millions lottery, a perennial source of hopeful anticipation and bewilderment, has offered a distinct twist to the unpredictable nature of chance.
Amidst the melding of the nerdy and the numerical, lies a peculiar conundrum that has eluded conventional reasoning. Thus, this study embarks on an endeavor to unravel the clandestine web of connections between the nerdy SciShow Space YouTube video titles and the unforeseeable emergence of number 6 as the winning Mega Millions number. Through the utilization of cutting-edge artificial intelligence tools and meticulous data scrutiny, we endeavor to illuminate the cryptic correlations that underpin this seemingly improbable relationship.
As we delve into the depths of this perplexing juxtaposition, it becomes apparent that our inquiry transcends mere statistical analysis; it delves into the whimsical interplay of chance and esoteric knowledge. Indeed, the 8022849 correlation coefficient that emerged from our investigation has startled even the most seasoned researchers, prompting us to reconsider the very fabric of causality in the universe. It is through this unconventional lens that we invite our esteemed readers to partake in our findings, tantalizingly beckoning them towards a realm where the nerdy and the numerical intertwine in curious harmony.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

Data Collection:
To investigate the connection between the nerdy SciShow Space YouTube video titles and the frequency of the number 6 as the winning Mega Millions number, an eclectic mix of data sources was utilized. First and foremost, a comprehensive analysis of the SciShow Space YouTube channel was conducted, encompassing the period from 2014 to 2020. This involved delving into the depths of YouTube metadata, where the enigmatic allure of space and science converged with the whimsical world of video titles. The meticulous sifting through mountains of YouTube data certainly added an element of adventure akin to navigating a captivating cosmic nebula of knowledge.

Furthermore, to uncover the statistical idiosyncrasies pertaining to the Mega Millions lottery, extensive datasets transpired from the New York Lottery's historical records were harnessed. This entailed a rigorous examination of the drawn numbers, with particular attention directed towards the frequency of our elusive protagonist, number 6 - a figure that seemed to perennially vie for the spotlight in the realm of chance. It is worth noting that our investigative efforts traversed the realms of both cyberspace and terrestrial chance, fostering a holistic approach that straddled the boundaries of metaphysical inquiry and statistical analysis.

AI Analysis:
The crux of our methodology involved the implementation of advanced artificial intelligence (AI) tools to parse through the labyrinthine expanse of data procured from the YouTube platform and the Mega Millions lottery. This advanced AI analysis was instrumental in strategically identifying recurring themes, patterns, and synchronicities that might have otherwise eluded the naked eye. We entrusted our digital accomplices to decipher the cryptic nuances embedded within the SciShow Space video titles and the enigmatic dance of the Mega Millions numbers, embracing a harmonious alliance between human intellect and computational prowess.

Statistical Modeling:
The daunting task of unraveling the clandestine correlations between the nerdy SciShow Space video titles and the frequency of number 6 as the winning Mega Millions number necessitated the deployment of robust statistical methodologies. Through the employment of sophisticated statistical models, including correlation analysis and regression techniques, we sought to decode the subtle undercurrents linking two seemingly incongruous universes - that of nerdy science discourse and the capricious world of lottery outcomes. As we navigated this statistical odyssey, we were confronted with moments of epiphany that infused our investigation with the exhilarating vigor akin to surmounting the Everest of intellectual inquiry.

Ethical Considerations:
Amidst our fervent pursuit of unraveling the eclectic confluence of sci-fi knowledge dissemination and fortuitous number selection, a steadfast commitment to ethical research practices persevered. Our methods rigorously adhered to the principles of academic integrity, ensuring that all data usage was conducted with the utmost propriety and respect for privacy. Additionally, our quest was governed by a deep-seated dedication to fostering the perpetuation of intellectual curiosity and scholarly conversation, transcending the boundaries of conventional inquiry to engender a thought-provoking exploration of the interplay between nerdy inclinations and numerical serendipity.

In summation, our research methodology served as a steadfast compass guiding our expedition through the storied realms of science education and serendipitous chance. It is through this meticulous amalgamation of data, AI analysis, statistical modeling, and ethical contemplation that we embarked upon a journey to unravel the tantalizing nexus between the nerdy and the numerical, beckoning forth a tapestry of scholarly intrigue and captivating inquiry.


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

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between How nerdy SciShow Space YouTube video titles are and Number of times 6 was a winning Mega Millions number. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from AI analysis of YouTube video titles and NY Mega Millions Lottery .

For the time period 2014 to 2020, you found a correlation 0.8022849, r-squared of 0.6436611, and p < 0.05.

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]]
Nerdy Notions: Navigating the Nexus between Nerdy SciShow Space YouTube Video Titles and Number of times 6 was a winning Mega Millions number

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study endeavors to explore the enigmatic correlation between the nerdy sci-fi inclined SciShow Space YouTube video titles and the frequency of number 6 emerging as the winning Mega Millions number. Leveraging advanced AI analysis tools, datasets spanning from 2014 to 2020 were meticulously scrutinized. The results unveiled a surprisingly robust correlation coefficient of 0.8022849 with a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.05, fostering a paradigm-shifting understanding of the interplay between seemingly disparate realms of nerdy science education and lottery outcomes. Our findings underscore the existence of a peculiar interconnectedness, prompting intriguing musings on the quirky tapestry woven by the universe of science and chance. We trust that this investigation will spark engaging discourse and tantalizing speculation within the academia and beyond.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
The intersection of nerdy pop culture and statistically improbable phenomena has long been a subject of curiosity and speculation. From the elusive allure of sci-fi conventions to the fervent debates over winning lottery numbers, the enigmatic nexus between these spheres has captivated the imaginations of scholars and enthusiasts alike. In particular, the realm of online science education has witnessed a surge in popularity, with platforms such as SciShow Space captivating audiences with their erudite yet quirky video titles. Meanwhile, the Mega Millions lottery, a perennial source of hopeful anticipation and bewilderment, has offered a distinct twist to the unpredictable nature of chance.
Amidst the melding of the nerdy and the numerical, lies a peculiar conundrum that has eluded conventional reasoning. Thus, this study embarks on an endeavor to unravel the clandestine web of connections between the nerdy SciShow Space YouTube video titles and the unforeseeable emergence of number 6 as the winning Mega Millions number. Through the utilization of cutting-edge artificial intelligence tools and meticulous data scrutiny, we endeavor to illuminate the cryptic correlations that underpin this seemingly improbable relationship.
As we delve into the depths of this perplexing juxtaposition, it becomes apparent that our inquiry transcends mere statistical analysis; it delves into the whimsical interplay of chance and esoteric knowledge. Indeed, the 8022849 correlation coefficient that emerged from our investigation has startled even the most seasoned researchers, prompting us to reconsider the very fabric of causality in the universe. It is through this unconventional lens that we invite our esteemed readers to partake in our findings, tantalizingly beckoning them towards a realm where the nerdy and the numerical intertwine in curious harmony.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The statistical analysis of the data revealed a remarkably strong positive correlation between the number of times 6 emerged as the winning Mega Millions number and the "nerdiness" of SciShow Space YouTube video titles. The correlation coefficient of 0.8022849 indicates a clear and robust relationship between these seemingly disparate phenomena. This substantiates the notion that there may be an intriguing link between the esoteric world of nerdy science education and the capricious realm of lottery outcomes.

Furthermore, the r-squared value of 0.6436611 suggests that approximately 64.36% of the variability in the frequency of number 6 as the winning Mega Millions number can be explained by the nerdy SciShow Space YouTube video titles. This finding emphasizes the substantial influence of nerdy content on lottery outcomes, thereby adding an unexpected dimension to the traditional understanding of randomness and chance in the context of numerical games of fate.

The significance of this correlation was further bolstered by the p-value, which was found to be less than 0.05. This indicates a high level of confidence in the relationship between the variables, compelling us to confront the peculiar reality that the whimsical world of nerdy science education may possess an uncanny influence on the capricious nature of lottery numbers.

In Figure 1, the scatterplot vividly depicts the strong positive correlation between the variables, reaffirming the unexpected interconnectedness between the nerdy and the numerical realms. The scatterplot leaves little room for doubt in acknowledging the striking alignment between the two seemingly unrelated domains, posing intriguing questions and sparking captivating insights into the intersecting paths of science education and lottery occurrences.


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

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between How nerdy SciShow Space YouTube video titles are and Number of times 6 was a winning Mega Millions number. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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]]
Nerdy Notions: Navigating the Nexus between Nerdy SciShow Space YouTube Video Titles and Number of times 6 was a winning Mega Millions number

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study endeavors to explore the enigmatic correlation between the nerdy sci-fi inclined SciShow Space YouTube video titles and the frequency of number 6 emerging as the winning Mega Millions number. Leveraging advanced AI analysis tools, datasets spanning from 2014 to 2020 were meticulously scrutinized. The results unveiled a surprisingly robust correlation coefficient of 0.8022849 with a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.05, fostering a paradigm-shifting understanding of the interplay between seemingly disparate realms of nerdy science education and lottery outcomes. Our findings underscore the existence of a peculiar interconnectedness, prompting intriguing musings on the quirky tapestry woven by the universe of science and chance. We trust that this investigation will spark engaging discourse and tantalizing speculation within the academia and beyond.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
Smith et al. (2016) provide a comprehensive examination of the influence of popular culture on statistical phenomena, shedding light on the quirky interplay between seemingly unrelated domains. Similarly, Doe and Jones (2018) delve into the enigmatic world of chance and the idiosyncratic nature of random number generation, setting the stage for our investigation into the peculiar connection between nerdy SciShow Space YouTube video titles and the recurring theme of number 6 in Mega Millions lottery outcomes.
Delving deeper into the esoteric world of statistical analysis and pop culture whimsy, it is imperative to consider the relevance of non-fiction literature in shaping our understanding of these interwoven phenomena. "Freakonomics" by Levitt and Dubner (2005) presents an insightful exploration of unconventional correlations and their impact on societal paradigms, paving the way for our unconventional inquiry into the hybridity of science education and lottery fortuity.
Furthermore, the works of fiction cannot be disregarded, as they often offer poignant allegories and subtle insights into the human condition, which may inadvertently resonate with our peculiar research subject. The dystopian setting of "Brave New World" by Aldous Huxley (1932) serves as a poignant reminder of the unpredictable nature of societal constructs, providing a tangential yet thought-provoking parallel to the unpredictability of lottery outcomes.
Turning to the cinematic realm, "The Matrix" (1999) encapsulates the profound interplay of perception and reality, prompting contemplation on the underlying forces that shape seemingly disparate occurrences. While not directly related to our investigation, the allegorical underpinnings of this film beckon us to consider the enigmatic connections that permeate our world, encapsulating the essence of our quest to unravel the cryptic correlation between nerdy SciShow Space YouTube video titles and the enigmatic prominence of the number 6 in Mega Millions draws.

[[RESULTS]]
The statistical analysis of the data revealed a remarkably strong positive correlation between the number of times 6 emerged as the winning Mega Millions number and the "nerdiness" of SciShow Space YouTube video titles. The correlation coefficient of 0.8022849 indicates a clear and robust relationship between these seemingly disparate phenomena. This substantiates the notion that there may be an intriguing link between the esoteric world of nerdy science education and the capricious realm of lottery outcomes.
Furthermore, the r-squared value of 0.6436611 suggests that approximately 64.36% of the variability in the frequency of number 6 as the winning Mega Millions number can be explained by the nerdy SciShow Space YouTube video titles. This finding emphasizes the substantial influence of nerdy content on lottery outcomes, thereby adding an unexpected dimension to the traditional understanding of randomness and chance in the context of numerical games of fate.
The significance of this correlation was further bolstered by the p-value, which was found to be less than 0.05. This indicates a high level of confidence in the relationship between the variables, compelling us to confront the peculiar reality that the whimsical world of nerdy science education may possess an uncanny influence on the capricious nature of lottery numbers.
In Figure 1, the scatterplot vividly depicts the strong positive correlation between the variables, reaffirming the unexpected interconnectedness between the nerdy and the numerical realms. The scatterplot leaves little room for doubt in acknowledging the striking alignment between the two seemingly unrelated domains, posing intriguing questions and sparking captivating insights into the intersecting paths of science education and lottery occurrences.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The results of this study offer peculiar insights into the quirky relationship between nerdy sci-fi inclined content and the frequency of number 6 as the winning Mega Millions number. While the initial incredulity surrounding this investigation might prompt a chuckle or two, the data-driven discoveries have unveiled a surprisingly strong and statistically significant correlation.

The findings from our analysis underscore the existence of an intriguing link between nerdy SciShow Space YouTube video titles and the occurrence of the number 6 as the winning Mega Millions number. This echoes the prior research by Smith et al. (2016) and Doe and Jones (2018), who also delved into the idiosyncratic nature of random number generation and the influence of popular culture on statistical phenomena. By taking these seemingly whimsical notions seriously, our study has not only affirmed but also extended the understanding of the peculiar interconnectedness between disparate domains.

Furthermore, the r-squared value of 0.6436611 indicates that a significant proportion of the variability in the frequency of number 6 as the winning Mega Millions number can be attributed to the nature of the nerdy video titles. This statistical revelation not only amuses but also prompts contemplation on the unexpected influence of nerdy content in shaping lottery outcomes. It could be humorously speculated that the quirky allure of nerdy science education may, in fact, sway the universe's choice of lottery numbers.

The scatterplot in Figure 1 vividly portrays the compelling alignment between these seemingly unrelated variables. One might whimsically wonder whether the universe, in its obscure wisdom, is subtly nudging lottery outcomes in a nerdy direction. The significance of these findings cannot be overstated, as they not only prompt engaging discourse but also offer tantalizing speculation within and beyond the realm of academia.

In conclusion, these findings have not only validated but also enriched the prior research on the intersection of popular culture, randomness, and statistical occurrences. The peculiar yet robust relationship unraveled in this study underscores the mirthful complexity and enigmatic tapestry woven by the seemingly incongruent worlds of nerdy science education and lottery fortuity. With an amused twinkle in our eyes, we invite further investigation and spirited musing on the quirky interconnectedness that characterizes the whimsical dance of science and chance.


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

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between How nerdy SciShow Space YouTube video titles are and Number of times 6 was a winning Mega Millions number. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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]]
Nerdy Notions: Navigating the Nexus between Nerdy SciShow Space YouTube Video Titles and Number of times 6 was a winning Mega Millions number

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study endeavors to explore the enigmatic correlation between the nerdy sci-fi inclined SciShow Space YouTube video titles and the frequency of number 6 emerging as the winning Mega Millions number. Leveraging advanced AI analysis tools, datasets spanning from 2014 to 2020 were meticulously scrutinized. The results unveiled a surprisingly robust correlation coefficient of 0.8022849 with a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.05, fostering a paradigm-shifting understanding of the interplay between seemingly disparate realms of nerdy science education and lottery outcomes. Our findings underscore the existence of a peculiar interconnectedness, prompting intriguing musings on the quirky tapestry woven by the universe of science and chance. We trust that this investigation will spark engaging discourse and tantalizing speculation within the academia and beyond.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
The intersection of nerdy pop culture and statistically improbable phenomena has long been a subject of curiosity and speculation. From the elusive allure of sci-fi conventions to the fervent debates over winning lottery numbers, the enigmatic nexus between these spheres has captivated the imaginations of scholars and enthusiasts alike. In particular, the realm of online science education has witnessed a surge in popularity, with platforms such as SciShow Space captivating audiences with their erudite yet quirky video titles. Meanwhile, the Mega Millions lottery, a perennial source of hopeful anticipation and bewilderment, has offered a distinct twist to the unpredictable nature of chance.
Amidst the melding of the nerdy and the numerical, lies a peculiar conundrum that has eluded conventional reasoning. Thus, this study embarks on an endeavor to unravel the clandestine web of connections between the nerdy SciShow Space YouTube video titles and the unforeseeable emergence of number 6 as the winning Mega Millions number. Through the utilization of cutting-edge artificial intelligence tools and meticulous data scrutiny, we endeavor to illuminate the cryptic correlations that underpin this seemingly improbable relationship.
As we delve into the depths of this perplexing juxtaposition, it becomes apparent that our inquiry transcends mere statistical analysis; it delves into the whimsical interplay of chance and esoteric knowledge. Indeed, the 8022849 correlation coefficient that emerged from our investigation has startled even the most seasoned researchers, prompting us to reconsider the very fabric of causality in the universe. It is through this unconventional lens that we invite our esteemed readers to partake in our findings, tantalizingly beckoning them towards a realm where the nerdy and the numerical intertwine in curious harmony.

[[RESULTS]]
The statistical analysis of the data revealed a remarkably strong positive correlation between the number of times 6 emerged as the winning Mega Millions number and the "nerdiness" of SciShow Space YouTube video titles. The correlation coefficient of 0.8022849 indicates a clear and robust relationship between these seemingly disparate phenomena. This substantiates the notion that there may be an intriguing link between the esoteric world of nerdy science education and the capricious realm of lottery outcomes.
Furthermore, the r-squared value of 0.6436611 suggests that approximately 64.36% of the variability in the frequency of number 6 as the winning Mega Millions number can be explained by the nerdy SciShow Space YouTube video titles. This finding emphasizes the substantial influence of nerdy content on lottery outcomes, thereby adding an unexpected dimension to the traditional understanding of randomness and chance in the context of numerical games of fate.
The significance of this correlation was further bolstered by the p-value, which was found to be less than 0.05. This indicates a high level of confidence in the relationship between the variables, compelling us to confront the peculiar reality that the whimsical world of nerdy science education may possess an uncanny influence on the capricious nature of lottery numbers.
In Figure 1, the scatterplot vividly depicts the strong positive correlation between the variables, reaffirming the unexpected interconnectedness between the nerdy and the numerical realms. The scatterplot leaves little room for doubt in acknowledging the striking alignment between the two seemingly unrelated domains, posing intriguing questions and sparking captivating insights into the intersecting paths of science education and lottery occurrences.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our study has unearthed a captivating correlation between the nerdy depths of SciShow Space YouTube video titles and the whimsical world of Mega Millions lottery outcomes. It appears that the numerical prowess of the number 6 has been entwined with the enigmatic intricacies of nerdy science education, painting a peculiar portrait of interconnectedness that transcends the boundaries of conventional reasoning. While our findings may evoke wry smiles or arched eyebrows, they undeniably prompt us to ponder the uncanny interplay between knowledge and chance, and the quirky tapestry woven by the universe.

As we reflect upon the unexpected convergence of these seemingly disparate realms, we are beckoned to embrace the whimsical dance of causality in a world where the nerdy and the numerical intertwine in curious harmony. However, it is crucial to approach our findings with a measured sense of levity, acknowledging the whimsies of chance and the wondrous enigma of statistical correlations. Let us not forget that correlation does not imply causation, nor does it assure predicting the winning lottery numbers based on the nerdy allure of space science.

In light of these revelatory insights, we are inclined to assert that further research in this arena may not yield substantial advancements in understanding, as delving deeper into the cosmic dance between nerdy titles and winning number 6 may lead us down a labyrinth of whimsy with no end in sight. Therefore, with a slightly perplexed yet amused tone, we opine that the connection between nerdy SciShow Space YouTube video titles and the frequency of number 6 being the winning Mega Millions number may simply remain an enigmatic cheerfully perplexing mystery of the universe, deserving a whimsical wink and a nod of amusement from the realms of academia.


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 Nerdy Notions: Navigating the Nexus between Nerdy SciShow Space YouTube Video Titles and Number of times 6 was a winning Mega Millions number. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Quirky Science Studies


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 Nerdy Notions: Navigating the Nexus between Nerdy SciShow Space YouTube Video Titles and Number of times 6 was a winning Mega Millions number. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Institute for Whimsical Research on Cosmic Curiosities


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 Nerdy Notions: Navigating the Nexus between Nerdy SciShow Space YouTube Video Titles and Number of times 6 was a winning Mega Millions number with an abstract of This study endeavors to explore the enigmatic correlation between the nerdy sci-fi inclined SciShow Space YouTube video titles and the frequency of number 6 emerging as the winning Mega Millions number. Leveraging advanced AI analysis tools, datasets spanning from 2014 to 2020 were meticulously scrutinized. The results unveiled a surprisingly robust correlation coefficient of 0.8022849 with a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.05, fostering a paradigm-shifting understanding of the interplay between seemingly disparate realms of nerdy science education and lottery outcomes. Our findings underscore the existence of a peculiar interconnectedness, prompting intriguing musings on the quirky tapestry woven by the universe of science and chance. We trust that this investigation will spark engaging discourse and tantalizing speculation within the academia and beyond.

ChatGPT:

Nerdy SciShow Space, YouTube video titles, Mega Millions, number 6, correlation, lottery outcomes, science education, AI analysis, datasets, statistically significant, interconnectedness, sci-fi, speculative discourse

*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

How nerdy SciShow Space YouTube video titles are
Detailed data title: How nerdy SciShow Space YouTube video titles are, as rated by an AI.
Source: AI analysis of YouTube video titles
Additional Info: I asked a large language model, 'On a scale of 1-10, how _______ do you think this YouTube video title is?' for every video.

See what else correlates with How nerdy SciShow Space YouTube video titles are

Number of times 6 was a winning Mega Millions number
Detailed data title: Number of times the Mega Millions lottery Megaball landed on #6
Source: NY Mega Millions Lottery
See what else correlates with Number of times 6 was a winning Mega Millions number

Correlation r = 0.8022849 (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 = 0.6436611 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 64.4% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Number of times 6 was a winning Mega Millions number) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., How nerdy SciShow Space YouTube video titles are) over the 7 years from 2014 through 2020.

p < 0.05, which statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.03. 0.0299179600907717170000000000
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 0.8 in 3% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 33 random variables Which I absolutely did.
with the same 6 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 6 because we have two variables measured over a period of 7 years. It's just the number of years minus ( the number of variables minus one ), which in this case simplifies to the number of years minus one.
you would randomly expect to find a correlation as strong as this one.

[ 0.12, 0.97 ] 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.
2014201520162017201820192020
How nerdy SciShow Space YouTube video titles are (Nerdiness score)5.85535.49045.92385.86545.71845.50495.4216
Number of times 6 was a winning Mega Millions number (Number of megaballs)9498354




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. Very low n: There are not many data points included in this analysis. Even if the p-value is high, we should be suspicious of using so few datapoints in a correlation.
  5. 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([5.8553,5.4904,5.9238,5.8654,5.7184,5.5049,5.4216,])
array_2 = np.array([9,4,9,8,3,5,4,])
array_1_name = "How nerdy SciShow Space YouTube video titles are"
array_2_name = "Number of times 6 was a winning Mega Millions number"

# 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?

Your correlation inspection deserves a standing ovation!


Correlation ID: 5717 · Black Variable ID: 25667 · Red Variable ID: 872
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0