Download png, svg
AI explanation
As the number of Libertarian votes for Senators in Colorado increased, so did the calls for less government regulation. This ultimately led to a hands-off approach to automotive safety standards. With fewer regulations in place, car manufacturers found themselves cutting corners, including those pesky air bag issues, as they were 'at liberty' to do so.Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image of a colorful 3D Pixar-style scene set in Colorado. In the background, a towering billboard displays a line graph depicting a steady increase in Libertarian senator votes, using vibrant colors and clear visual representation. In the foreground, a car with a noticeable airbag issue is being waved through a checkpoint by an inspector, who holds a sign reading "No regulations, no problem." The scene should be captivating and visually dynamic, capturing the juxtaposition of political and safety elements. The depiction should include only scenes, people, and objects, it should not include text or speech bubbles.
This image generation prompt was also generated by AI, using the following sequence:
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You select one of a few potential scene descriptors that seems to go along with the variables described. You respond only with the scene descriptions provided and say nothing else.
User prompt: Here are two variables: Votes for Libertarian Senators in Colorado and Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags. Given these, which of the following image style descriptions seems most appropriate? Pick the one that seems to be related to one of the variables at hand. Please respond with only one of the following potential descriptions: A scene from Skyrim inspired by bauhaus Data cyber art 3D Pixar Style Cutsy graphics
ChatGPT: 3D Pixar Style
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You describe simple visual scenes that depict the two variables stated. You combine both variables into one scene.
User prompt: Please describe a visual scene that prominently depicts both Votes for Libertarian Senators in Colorado and Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags, in the following situation: As the number of Libertarian votes for Senators in Colorado increased, so did the calls for less government regulation. This ultimately led to a hands-off approach to automotive safety standards. With fewer regulations in place, car manufacturers found themselves cutting corners, including those pesky air bag issues, as they were 'at liberty' to do so.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In Colorado, a line graph showing an increase in Libertarian senator votes is displayed on a billboard. Next to it, a car with an airbag issue is shown being waved through a checkpoint with a sign that reads "No regulations, no problem."
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: [ 3D Pixar Style ] and depicting this scene: In Colorado, a line graph showing an increase in Libertarian senator votes is displayed on a billboard. Next to it, a car with an airbag issue is shown being waved through a checkpoint with a sign that reads "No regulations, no problem." Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image of a colorful 3D Pixar-style scene set in Colorado. In the background, a towering billboard displays a line graph depicting a steady increase in Libertarian senator votes, using vibrant colors and clear visual representation. In the foreground, a car with a noticeable airbag issue is being waved through a checkpoint by an inspector, who holds a sign reading "No regulations, no problem." The scene should be captivating and visually dynamic, capturing the juxtaposition of political and safety elements.
*Variations in the User Prompts from chart to chart are just the result of random number generation in Python. I wrote a few arrays of various styles and methods to ask questions to change up the results. Every time this site writes an explanation or generates an image, the script picks from each at random.
I sequence the requests into multiple prompts because I find GPT 3.5 to perform much better with short, well-managed contexts. Thus, I track the context directly in Python and only ask ChatGPT targeted questions.
System prompt: You provide humorous responses in the form of plausible sounding explanations for correlations. You assume the correlation is causative for the purpose of the explanation even if it is ridiculous. You do not chat with the user, you only reply with the causal connection explanation and nothing else.
User prompt: Please make up a funny explanation for how an increase in Libertarian votes for Senators in Colorado caused Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags to increase. Make it feel plausible.
AI academic paper
Libertarian Votes and Air Bag Woes: A Political Puncture or Statistical Silliness? The Journal of Quirky Political Science Jan 2024 Reminder: This paper is AI-generated. Not real! |
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You write titles and abstracts of goofy academic research papers.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, and add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Libertarian votes for Senators in Colorado and Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.
Make the title a clever pun.
Your research team used data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and US DOT to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9916051 and p < 0.01 for 1990 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]]
"Libertarian Votes and Air Bag Woes: A Political Puncture or Statistical Silliness?"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the quirky relationship between Libertarian votes for Senators in Colorado and the occurrence of automotive recalls for issues with air bags. By scrutinizing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US DOT, our research team uncovered a correlation coefficient of 0.9916051 and p < 0.01 for the years 1990 to 2020. We explore this unexpected connection through a blend of political analysis and statistical whimsy. The findings, while surprising, may leave some pondering whether it's a case of statistical serendipity or a political puncture.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft the introduction section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Libertarian votes for Senators in Colorado and Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.
Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Libertarian Votes and Air Bag Woes: A Political Puncture or Statistical Silliness?"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the quirky relationship between Libertarian votes for Senators in Colorado and the occurrence of automotive recalls for issues with air bags. By scrutinizing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US DOT, our research team uncovered a correlation coefficient of 0.9916051 and p < 0.01 for the years 1990 to 2020. We explore this unexpected connection through a blend of political analysis and statistical whimsy. The findings, while surprising, may leave some pondering whether it's a case of statistical serendipity or a political puncture.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
Automotive recalls and political voting patterns may seem like an unlikely duo, akin to a mismatched pair of socks or a sweet dessert followed by a spicy entree. However, our research aims to uncover the peculiar relationship between Libertarian votes for Senators in Colorado and the occurrence of automotive recalls for issues with air bags. Can political choices truly influence the reliability of our vehicles, or is this connection merely a statistical fluke? Buckle up as we embark on a journey through the intersection of politics and automotive safety, where the road may be bumpy but the insights are undeniably intriguing.
The notion of air bags, those silent guardians of vehicular safety, encountering woes might jar our sensibilities like a sudden pothole in an otherwise smooth commute. Yet, our investigation is not merely an exercise in statistical whimsy; rather, it seeks to shed light on a correlation whose significance extends beyond the realm of numbers and charts. As we navigate through the labyrinth of data, we remain ever-mindful of the unexpected twists and turns that statistical analyses can yield, akin to navigating a roundabout in a foreign land – perplexing yet filled with intriguing possibilities.
This research tackles a conundrum that may puzzle even the most astute observers, akin to deciphering a cryptic crossword clue with no clear solution in sight. The tie between political preferences and automotive recalls may seem as incongruous as pairing a red wine with fish, but our findings urge us to consider the possibility that beneath this apparent incongruity lies a tale of hidden correlations and unsuspected intricacies.
The aim here is not to merely tickle the fancy of data enthusiasts with statistical oddities but to unravel a puzzle that may have wider implications. Through scrutiny of data sources ranging from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab to the US DOT, and the Harvard Dataverse, we endeavor to provide a nuanced understanding of this unlikely linkage. So, grab hold of the proverbial steering wheel of inquiry as we embark on a journey through the twists and turns of political voting patterns and automotive safety, where the unexpected findings are as intriguing as stumbling upon a secret shortcut during rush-hour traffic.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft a literature review section of an academic research paper, that starts out dry for the first few sentences but then becomes hilarious and goofy.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Libertarian votes for Senators in Colorado and Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.
Speak in the present tense for this section (the authors find...), as is common in academic research paper literature reviews. Name the sources in a format similar to this: In "Book," the authors find lorem and ipsum.
Make up the lorem and ipsum part, but make it sound related to the topic at hand.
Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then name a few real TV shows that sound like they might be relevant to the topic that you watched as research.
Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Libertarian Votes and Air Bag Woes: A Political Puncture or Statistical Silliness?"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the quirky relationship between Libertarian votes for Senators in Colorado and the occurrence of automotive recalls for issues with air bags. By scrutinizing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US DOT, our research team uncovered a correlation coefficient of 0.9916051 and p < 0.01 for the years 1990 to 2020. We explore this unexpected connection through a blend of political analysis and statistical whimsy. The findings, while surprising, may leave some pondering whether it's a case of statistical serendipity or a political puncture.
-------
And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
Automotive recalls and political voting patterns may seem like an unlikely duo, akin to a mismatched pair of socks or a sweet dessert followed by a spicy entree. However, our research aims to uncover the peculiar relationship between Libertarian votes for Senators in Colorado and the occurrence of automotive recalls for issues with air bags. Can political choices truly influence the reliability of our vehicles, or is this connection merely a statistical fluke? Buckle up as we embark on a journey through the intersection of politics and automotive safety, where the road may be bumpy but the insights are undeniably intriguing.
The notion of air bags, those silent guardians of vehicular safety, encountering woes might jar our sensibilities like a sudden pothole in an otherwise smooth commute. Yet, our investigation is not merely an exercise in statistical whimsy; rather, it seeks to shed light on a correlation whose significance extends beyond the realm of numbers and charts. As we navigate through the labyrinth of data, we remain ever-mindful of the unexpected twists and turns that statistical analyses can yield, akin to navigating a roundabout in a foreign land – perplexing yet filled with intriguing possibilities.
This research tackles a conundrum that may puzzle even the most astute observers, akin to deciphering a cryptic crossword clue with no clear solution in sight. The tie between political preferences and automotive recalls may seem as incongruous as pairing a red wine with fish, but our findings urge us to consider the possibility that beneath this apparent incongruity lies a tale of hidden correlations and unsuspected intricacies.
The aim here is not to merely tickle the fancy of data enthusiasts with statistical oddities but to unravel a puzzle that may have wider implications. Through scrutiny of data sources ranging from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab to the US DOT, and the Harvard Dataverse, we endeavor to provide a nuanced understanding of this unlikely linkage. So, grab hold of the proverbial steering wheel of inquiry as we embark on a journey through the twists and turns of political voting patterns and automotive safety, where the unexpected findings are as intriguing as stumbling upon a secret shortcut during rush-hour traffic.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
In "Smith and Doe's Exploration of Political Influence on Automotive Safety," the authors find that Libertarian votes for Senators in Colorado have an unexpected association with the frequency of automotive recalls for air bag issues. This curious correlation has sparked both skepticism and curiosity within the research community, raising questions about the potential impact of political ideologies on the mechanical reliability of vehicles.
Jones et al., in their work "Political Puzzles: Unraveling the Mysteries of Voting Patterns and Vehicle Defects," delve into the curious connection between libertarianism and automotive recalls, offering insightful analysis peppered with statistical whimsy. Their findings prompt us to consider whether there may be a deeper, unexpected relationship at play, beyond the surface level of political preference and automotive safety.
Turning our attention to the wider literary landscape, books such as "Free Markets and Faulty Airbags: An Unlikely Relationship" by Lorem Ipsum and "The Libertarian Paradox: Political Principles and Puzzling Recalls" by Dolor Sit Amet, provide thought-provoking perspectives on the intersection of political ideologies and automotive engineering. These works delve into the intricacies of libertarian voting behavior while weaving in the unforeseen consequences for vehicular safety, offering both enlightenment and entertainment to readers.
On the fictional front, titles such as "The Air Bag Affair" by Agatha Christie and "Libertarian Votes and Vehicular Volatility" by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (if they were alive and decided to tackle this unlikely topic) may not offer empirical evidence, but their nuanced exploration of political intrigue and unexpected twists could certainly inspire fresh avenues of inquiry.
In a twist that may surprise some, TV shows such as "The Politician Mechanic" and "Recall Wars: Automotive Edition" offer a whimsical yet informative glimpse into the offbeat world of political voting patterns and automotive recalls. While these programs may blur the line between reality and escapism, their portrayal of the intersection between politics and engineering quirks presents a lighthearted take on this captivating subject matter.
As we immerse ourselves in the literature and media landscape surrounding this peculiar phenomenon, it becomes apparent that the unexpected connection between libertarian votes and air bag recalls is not just a statistical blip but a rich tapestry of political punctures and automotive whimsy waiting to be unravelled.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft the methodology section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Libertarian votes for Senators in Colorado and Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.
Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and US DOT . You used data from 1990 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]]
"Libertarian Votes and Air Bag Woes: A Political Puncture or Statistical Silliness?"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the quirky relationship between Libertarian votes for Senators in Colorado and the occurrence of automotive recalls for issues with air bags. By scrutinizing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US DOT, our research team uncovered a correlation coefficient of 0.9916051 and p < 0.01 for the years 1990 to 2020. We explore this unexpected connection through a blend of political analysis and statistical whimsy. The findings, while surprising, may leave some pondering whether it's a case of statistical serendipity or a political puncture.
[[INTRODUCTION]]
Automotive recalls and political voting patterns may seem like an unlikely duo, akin to a mismatched pair of socks or a sweet dessert followed by a spicy entree. However, our research aims to uncover the peculiar relationship between Libertarian votes for Senators in Colorado and the occurrence of automotive recalls for issues with air bags. Can political choices truly influence the reliability of our vehicles, or is this connection merely a statistical fluke? Buckle up as we embark on a journey through the intersection of politics and automotive safety, where the road may be bumpy but the insights are undeniably intriguing.
The notion of air bags, those silent guardians of vehicular safety, encountering woes might jar our sensibilities like a sudden pothole in an otherwise smooth commute. Yet, our investigation is not merely an exercise in statistical whimsy; rather, it seeks to shed light on a correlation whose significance extends beyond the realm of numbers and charts. As we navigate through the labyrinth of data, we remain ever-mindful of the unexpected twists and turns that statistical analyses can yield, akin to navigating a roundabout in a foreign land – perplexing yet filled with intriguing possibilities.
This research tackles a conundrum that may puzzle even the most astute observers, akin to deciphering a cryptic crossword clue with no clear solution in sight. The tie between political preferences and automotive recalls may seem as incongruous as pairing a red wine with fish, but our findings urge us to consider the possibility that beneath this apparent incongruity lies a tale of hidden correlations and unsuspected intricacies.
The aim here is not to merely tickle the fancy of data enthusiasts with statistical oddities but to unravel a puzzle that may have wider implications. Through scrutiny of data sources ranging from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab to the US DOT, and the Harvard Dataverse, we endeavor to provide a nuanced understanding of this unlikely linkage. So, grab hold of the proverbial steering wheel of inquiry as we embark on a journey through the twists and turns of political voting patterns and automotive safety, where the unexpected findings are as intriguing as stumbling upon a secret shortcut during rush-hour traffic.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
ChatGPT:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
Our methodology for uncovering the peculiar relationship between Libertarian votes for Senators in Colorado and automotive recalls for issues with air bags involved a concoction of statistical rigor and a touch of whimsy. We procured data from various sources, primarily the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US Department of Transportation. The years under scrutiny spanned the period from 1990 to 2020, allowing us to capture the evolution of political choices and automotive safety issues over three decades.
First, we traversed the vast expanse of electoral data, akin to a political archeologist unearthing buried voting preferences. With the precision of a surgeon wielding a scalpel, we extracted Libertarian votes for Senators in Colorado, dissecting the nuances of electoral choices that may often perplex even the most seasoned political pundits. Our efforts to procure this data involved navigating through the labyrinthine corridors of information repositories, bypassing the detours of irrelevant data and skirting the speed bumps of data inconsistency.
Simultaneously, our foray into the domain of automotive recalls for issues with air bags mirrored a detective's quest for elusive clues. We meticulously combed through data from the US DOT, keeping our analytic magnifying glass at the ready to detect any statistical fingerprints that could lead us to a potential correlation. The process of sifting through automotive recall information was akin to navigating a maze of vehicle safety records, dodging the occasional statistical dead-end while remaining vigilant for the slightest indication of a consequential connection.
Once the data on Libertarian votes and automotive recalls were captured, we proceeded to perform a sophisticated dance of statistical analysis. Employing techniques that would make even the most seasoned data scientist pause with admiration, we computed correlation coefficients, confidence intervals, and p-values. The statistical toolbox at our disposal resembled a treasure trove of analytical instruments, and we wielded these tools with the finesse of a virtuoso maestro conducting a symphony of data.
Furthermore, we conducted robustness checks and sensitivity analyses to ensure that the observed relationship between Libertarian votes and automotive recalls did not buckle under the weight of alternative statistical models or data permutations. This process involved scrutinizing our findings from diverse angles, akin to turning a multifaceted gemstone under different sources of light to reveal its true brilliance.
In addition, we adopted a cautious approach toward the interpretation of our findings, acknowledging the possibility of lurking confounders and spurious correlations. Our pursuit of scientific integrity compelled us to exercise prudence akin to a wary driver navigating treacherous road conditions, ensuring that our conclusions remained grounded in empirical evidence rather than succumbing to the allure of statistical mirages.
In summary, our methodology was a fusion of meticulous data retrieval, intricate statistical analyses, and a touch of audacious curiosity. Our journey through the intersection of political voting patterns and automotive safety was riddled with unexpected twists and turns, yet our methodological approach remained steadfast in its pursuit of unraveling the enigmatic relationship between Libertarian votes and air bag recalls.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft the results section of an academic research paper. You speak in the past tense (you found...).
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Libertarian votes for Senators in Colorado and Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.
Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and US DOT .
For the time period 1990 to 2020, you found a correlation 0.9916051, r-squared of 0.9832806, 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]]
"Libertarian Votes and Air Bag Woes: A Political Puncture or Statistical Silliness?"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the quirky relationship between Libertarian votes for Senators in Colorado and the occurrence of automotive recalls for issues with air bags. By scrutinizing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US DOT, our research team uncovered a correlation coefficient of 0.9916051 and p < 0.01 for the years 1990 to 2020. We explore this unexpected connection through a blend of political analysis and statistical whimsy. The findings, while surprising, may leave some pondering whether it's a case of statistical serendipity or a political puncture.
-------
And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
Automotive recalls and political voting patterns may seem like an unlikely duo, akin to a mismatched pair of socks or a sweet dessert followed by a spicy entree. However, our research aims to uncover the peculiar relationship between Libertarian votes for Senators in Colorado and the occurrence of automotive recalls for issues with air bags. Can political choices truly influence the reliability of our vehicles, or is this connection merely a statistical fluke? Buckle up as we embark on a journey through the intersection of politics and automotive safety, where the road may be bumpy but the insights are undeniably intriguing.
The notion of air bags, those silent guardians of vehicular safety, encountering woes might jar our sensibilities like a sudden pothole in an otherwise smooth commute. Yet, our investigation is not merely an exercise in statistical whimsy; rather, it seeks to shed light on a correlation whose significance extends beyond the realm of numbers and charts. As we navigate through the labyrinth of data, we remain ever-mindful of the unexpected twists and turns that statistical analyses can yield, akin to navigating a roundabout in a foreign land – perplexing yet filled with intriguing possibilities.
This research tackles a conundrum that may puzzle even the most astute observers, akin to deciphering a cryptic crossword clue with no clear solution in sight. The tie between political preferences and automotive recalls may seem as incongruous as pairing a red wine with fish, but our findings urge us to consider the possibility that beneath this apparent incongruity lies a tale of hidden correlations and unsuspected intricacies.
The aim here is not to merely tickle the fancy of data enthusiasts with statistical oddities but to unravel a puzzle that may have wider implications. Through scrutiny of data sources ranging from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab to the US DOT, and the Harvard Dataverse, we endeavor to provide a nuanced understanding of this unlikely linkage. So, grab hold of the proverbial steering wheel of inquiry as we embark on a journey through the twists and turns of political voting patterns and automotive safety, where the unexpected findings are as intriguing as stumbling upon a secret shortcut during rush-hour traffic.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[RESULTS]]
ChatGPT:
[[RESULTS]]
The investigation into the curious connection between Libertarian votes for Senators in Colorado and the frequency of automotive recalls for air bag issues unveiled a correlation coefficient of 0.9916051 and an r-squared value of 0.9832806. In statistical terms, these values indicate an exceptionally strong association between the two variables during the period spanning from 1990 to 2020. The p-value, strikingly less than 0.01, further underscores the robustness of this relationship, prompting both raised eyebrows and peals of laughter from the statistical sleuths among us.
Notoriously known for their strong convictions and principles, it seems Libertarians may also have an unexpected influence on the reliability of our trusty steeds' air bags. This finding may leave one contemplating the subtle influence of political choices on not just public policy but also on the mechanical intricacies of our four-wheeled companions.
The scatterplot (Fig. 1) paints a vivid picture of this surprising relationship, akin to observing a rare astronomical conjunction or witnessing the unlikeliest of duets harmonizing on stage. The data points converge in a manner that can only be described as nothing short of a statistical waltz, leading one to appreciate the whimsical nature of correlation analysis and the unexpected connections it can reveal.
In conclusion, this exploration into the seemingly disparate worlds of political voting patterns and automotive safety has unveiled a correlation that challenges conventional expectations. Whether this is a case of statistical serendipity or a substantive link deserving further examination, one thing remains certain: the interplay between vehicle safety and political proclivities is not as straightforward as changing lanes on a highway. It presents an enigma due for unraveling, leaving us to ponder if this is a statistical curiosity or a hidden consequence of political decision-making.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft the discussion section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Libertarian votes for Senators in Colorado and Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.
Limit your response to 500 tokens.
Here are the title, abstract, literature review, and results sections. Please harken back to 1-2 of the goofy items in the literature review, but pretend to take them completely seriously. Discuss how your results supported the prior research.
Do not write a conclusion. I will add a conclusion after this.
[[TITLE]]
"Libertarian Votes and Air Bag Woes: A Political Puncture or Statistical Silliness?"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the quirky relationship between Libertarian votes for Senators in Colorado and the occurrence of automotive recalls for issues with air bags. By scrutinizing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US DOT, our research team uncovered a correlation coefficient of 0.9916051 and p < 0.01 for the years 1990 to 2020. We explore this unexpected connection through a blend of political analysis and statistical whimsy. The findings, while surprising, may leave some pondering whether it's a case of statistical serendipity or a political puncture.
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
In "Smith and Doe's Exploration of Political Influence on Automotive Safety," the authors find that Libertarian votes for Senators in Colorado have an unexpected association with the frequency of automotive recalls for air bag issues. This curious correlation has sparked both skepticism and curiosity within the research community, raising questions about the potential impact of political ideologies on the mechanical reliability of vehicles.
Jones et al., in their work "Political Puzzles: Unraveling the Mysteries of Voting Patterns and Vehicle Defects," delve into the curious connection between libertarianism and automotive recalls, offering insightful analysis peppered with statistical whimsy. Their findings prompt us to consider whether there may be a deeper, unexpected relationship at play, beyond the surface level of political preference and automotive safety.
Turning our attention to the wider literary landscape, books such as "Free Markets and Faulty Airbags: An Unlikely Relationship" by Lorem Ipsum and "The Libertarian Paradox: Political Principles and Puzzling Recalls" by Dolor Sit Amet, provide thought-provoking perspectives on the intersection of political ideologies and automotive engineering. These works delve into the intricacies of libertarian voting behavior while weaving in the unforeseen consequences for vehicular safety, offering both enlightenment and entertainment to readers.
On the fictional front, titles such as "The Air Bag Affair" by Agatha Christie and "Libertarian Votes and Vehicular Volatility" by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (if they were alive and decided to tackle this unlikely topic) may not offer empirical evidence, but their nuanced exploration of political intrigue and unexpected twists could certainly inspire fresh avenues of inquiry.
In a twist that may surprise some, TV shows such as "The Politician Mechanic" and "Recall Wars: Automotive Edition" offer a whimsical yet informative glimpse into the offbeat world of political voting patterns and automotive recalls. While these programs may blur the line between reality and escapism, their portrayal of the intersection between politics and engineering quirks presents a lighthearted take on this captivating subject matter.
As we immerse ourselves in the literature and media landscape surrounding this peculiar phenomenon, it becomes apparent that the unexpected connection between libertarian votes and air bag recalls is not just a statistical blip but a rich tapestry of political punctures and automotive whimsy waiting to be unravelled.
[[RESULTS]]
The investigation into the curious connection between Libertarian votes for Senators in Colorado and the frequency of automotive recalls for air bag issues unveiled a correlation coefficient of 0.9916051 and an r-squared value of 0.9832806. In statistical terms, these values indicate an exceptionally strong association between the two variables during the period spanning from 1990 to 2020. The p-value, strikingly less than 0.01, further underscores the robustness of this relationship, prompting both raised eyebrows and peals of laughter from the statistical sleuths among us.
Notoriously known for their strong convictions and principles, it seems Libertarians may also have an unexpected influence on the reliability of our trusty steeds' air bags. This finding may leave one contemplating the subtle influence of political choices on not just public policy but also on the mechanical intricacies of our four-wheeled companions.
The scatterplot (Fig. 1) paints a vivid picture of this surprising relationship, akin to observing a rare astronomical conjunction or witnessing the unlikeliest of duets harmonizing on stage. The data points converge in a manner that can only be described as nothing short of a statistical waltz, leading one to appreciate the whimsical nature of correlation analysis and the unexpected connections it can reveal.
In conclusion, this exploration into the seemingly disparate worlds of political voting patterns and automotive safety has unveiled a correlation that challenges conventional expectations. Whether this is a case of statistical serendipity or a substantive link deserving further examination, one thing remains certain: the interplay between vehicle safety and political proclivities is not as straightforward as changing lanes on a highway. It presents an enigma due for unraveling, leaving us to ponder if this is a statistical curiosity or a hidden consequence of political decision-making.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[DISCUSSION]]
ChatGPT:
[[DISCUSSION]]
The results of our study provide empirical support for the quirky and unexpected relationship between Libertarian votes for Senators in Colorado and the occurrence of automotive recalls for air bag issues, as previously hinted at in the literature. The robust correlation coefficient of 0.9916051 and a p-value less than 0.01 confirm and extend the findings of prior research, robustifying the hypothesis that political leanings may indeed intertwine with vehicular safety in a manner more whimsical than one might initially suspect.
The literature review deftly brought our attention to the uncharted territory that marries political influences and vehicular malfunctions. While it may sound like the stuff of fiction, the pervasive theme of political punctures and automotive whimsy resonates more strongly than expected. As highlighted by Jones et al., the unexpected association is not merely a symbolic statistical blip, but a revealing insight into the interplay of individual ideologies and mechanical reliability.
The strength of the correlation, depicted with the elegance of a statistical waltz in our scatterplot, further emphasizes the compelling nature of this relationship. It's akin to finding humor in an unexpected situation – disarming yet thought-provoking. The robustness of the association, encapsulated by the high r-squared value, adds depth to our understanding and quells any lingering doubts about the sincerity of this statistical oddity.
Were Agatha Christie or Sir Arthur Conan Doyle alive to witness this statistical sleuthing, they might have found fodder for a literary masterpiece. The intertwining of political intrigue and vehicular whimsy would undoubtedly spark their sleuthing instincts. It is a testament to the unpredictability and richness of statistical analyses that such unlikely connections can be unearthed.
As we consider the implications of our findings, it becomes apparent that the intersection of political choices and vehicular reliability is a puzzle worth solving. The enigma of whether this relationship constitutes a statistical serendipity or a substantive link is a tantalizing knot that demands unraveling. Perhaps, in the world of statistical whimsy, the unexpected is precisely where the laughter of truth resides. The future, shrouded in statistical uncertainty, promises both further exploration and a dash of whimsy.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft the discussion section of goofy academic research papers that sounds like it belongs based on the title and abstract provided.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Libertarian votes for Senators in Colorado and Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.
Limit your response to 300 tokens. At the very end, assert that no more research is needed in this area.
Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
"Libertarian Votes and Air Bag Woes: A Political Puncture or Statistical Silliness?"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the quirky relationship between Libertarian votes for Senators in Colorado and the occurrence of automotive recalls for issues with air bags. By scrutinizing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US DOT, our research team uncovered a correlation coefficient of 0.9916051 and p < 0.01 for the years 1990 to 2020. We explore this unexpected connection through a blend of political analysis and statistical whimsy. The findings, while surprising, may leave some pondering whether it's a case of statistical serendipity or a political puncture.
[[INTRDUCTION]]
Automotive recalls and political voting patterns may seem like an unlikely duo, akin to a mismatched pair of socks or a sweet dessert followed by a spicy entree. However, our research aims to uncover the peculiar relationship between Libertarian votes for Senators in Colorado and the occurrence of automotive recalls for issues with air bags. Can political choices truly influence the reliability of our vehicles, or is this connection merely a statistical fluke? Buckle up as we embark on a journey through the intersection of politics and automotive safety, where the road may be bumpy but the insights are undeniably intriguing.
The notion of air bags, those silent guardians of vehicular safety, encountering woes might jar our sensibilities like a sudden pothole in an otherwise smooth commute. Yet, our investigation is not merely an exercise in statistical whimsy; rather, it seeks to shed light on a correlation whose significance extends beyond the realm of numbers and charts. As we navigate through the labyrinth of data, we remain ever-mindful of the unexpected twists and turns that statistical analyses can yield, akin to navigating a roundabout in a foreign land – perplexing yet filled with intriguing possibilities.
This research tackles a conundrum that may puzzle even the most astute observers, akin to deciphering a cryptic crossword clue with no clear solution in sight. The tie between political preferences and automotive recalls may seem as incongruous as pairing a red wine with fish, but our findings urge us to consider the possibility that beneath this apparent incongruity lies a tale of hidden correlations and unsuspected intricacies.
The aim here is not to merely tickle the fancy of data enthusiasts with statistical oddities but to unravel a puzzle that may have wider implications. Through scrutiny of data sources ranging from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab to the US DOT, and the Harvard Dataverse, we endeavor to provide a nuanced understanding of this unlikely linkage. So, grab hold of the proverbial steering wheel of inquiry as we embark on a journey through the twists and turns of political voting patterns and automotive safety, where the unexpected findings are as intriguing as stumbling upon a secret shortcut during rush-hour traffic.
[[RESULTS]]
The investigation into the curious connection between Libertarian votes for Senators in Colorado and the frequency of automotive recalls for air bag issues unveiled a correlation coefficient of 0.9916051 and an r-squared value of 0.9832806. In statistical terms, these values indicate an exceptionally strong association between the two variables during the period spanning from 1990 to 2020. The p-value, strikingly less than 0.01, further underscores the robustness of this relationship, prompting both raised eyebrows and peals of laughter from the statistical sleuths among us.
Notoriously known for their strong convictions and principles, it seems Libertarians may also have an unexpected influence on the reliability of our trusty steeds' air bags. This finding may leave one contemplating the subtle influence of political choices on not just public policy but also on the mechanical intricacies of our four-wheeled companions.
The scatterplot (Fig. 1) paints a vivid picture of this surprising relationship, akin to observing a rare astronomical conjunction or witnessing the unlikeliest of duets harmonizing on stage. The data points converge in a manner that can only be described as nothing short of a statistical waltz, leading one to appreciate the whimsical nature of correlation analysis and the unexpected connections it can reveal.
In conclusion, this exploration into the seemingly disparate worlds of political voting patterns and automotive safety has unveiled a correlation that challenges conventional expectations. Whether this is a case of statistical serendipity or a substantive link deserving further examination, one thing remains certain: the interplay between vehicle safety and political proclivities is not as straightforward as changing lanes on a highway. It presents an enigma due for unraveling, leaving us to ponder if this is a statistical curiosity or a hidden consequence of political decision-making.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[CONCLUSION]]
ChatGPT:
[[CONCLUSION]]
In closing, our inquiry into the peculiar nexus of Libertarian votes for Senators in Colorado and the occurrence of automotive recalls for air bag issues has revealed a correlation that is as captivating as stumbling upon a unicorn in rush-hour traffic. The robust correlation coefficient of 0.9916051 and the remarkably low p-value leave us pondering whether political choices wield an unforeseen influence not just on public policies but also on the mechanical reliability of our beloved automobiles.
The scatterplot (Fig. 1) showcasing this bizarre relationship invites contemplation, akin to viewing an abstract painting that defies conventional interpretation. It's a reminder that statistical analysis, much like deciphering a cryptic crossword clue, can lead us down unexpected paths, occasionally landing us in a place where the air is filled with statistical serendipity.
However, while the allure of this linkage may be as enchanting as a scenic drive along the coast, we must exercise caution not to embark on flights of statistical fancy. Further research is essential to unveil the underlying mechanisms driving this correlation. Nonetheless, for now, we assert that no more research is needed in this area, trusting that our findings will serve as a roadmap for future explorations at the curious intersection of political voting patterns and automotive safety.
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 Libertarian Votes and Air Bag Woes: A Political Puncture or Statistical Silliness?. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.
ChatGPT:
The Journal of Quirky Political Science
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 Libertarian Votes and Air Bag Woes: A Political Puncture or Statistical Silliness?. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.
ChatGPT:
Institute for Comedic Socio-Political Research and Analysis
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 Libertarian Votes and Air Bag Woes: A Political Puncture or Statistical Silliness? with an abstract of This study delves into the quirky relationship between Libertarian votes for Senators in Colorado and the occurrence of automotive recalls for issues with air bags. By scrutinizing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US DOT, our research team uncovered a correlation coefficient of 0.9916051 and p < 0.01 for the years 1990 to 2020. We explore this unexpected connection through a blend of political analysis and statistical whimsy. The findings, while surprising, may leave some pondering whether it's a case of statistical serendipity or a political puncture.
ChatGPT:
Libertarian votes, Senators, Colorado, automotive recalls, air bags, correlation coefficient, political analysis, statistical analysis, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, US DOT, statistical serendipity, political puncture
*There is a bunch of Python happening behind the scenes to turn this prompt sequence into a PDF.
Discover a new correlation
View all correlations
View all research papers
Report an error
Data details
Votes for Libertarian Senators in ColoradoDetailed data title: Total number of votes cast for Federal Libertarian Senate candidates in Colorado
Source: MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse
See what else correlates with Votes for Libertarian Senators in Colorado
Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags
Source: US DOT
See what else correlates with Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags
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 = 0.9832806 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 98.3% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Votes for Libertarian Senators in Colorado) over the 8 years from 1990 through 2020.
p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 1.5E-6. 0.0000014697839300723430000000
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 0.99 in 0.00015% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 680,372 random variables You don't actually need 680 thousand 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 7 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 7 because we have two variables measured over a period of 8 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.
[ 0.95, 1 ] 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.
1992 | 1998 | 2002 | 2004 | 2010 | 2014 | 2016 | 2020 | |
Votes for Libertarian Senators in Colorado (Total votes) | 23 | 14024 | 20776 | 10160 | 22589 | 52876 | 99277 | 56262 |
Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags (Recalls) | 4 | 13 | 21 | 14 | 16 | 48 | 106 | 58 |
Why this works
- Data dredging: I have 25,237 variables in my database. I compare all these variables against each other to find ones that randomly match up. That's 636,906,169 correlation calculations! This is called “data dredging.” Instead of starting with a hypothesis and testing it, I instead abused the data to see what correlations shake out. It’s a dangerous way to go about analysis, because any sufficiently large dataset will yield strong correlations completely at random.
- Lack of causal connection: There is probably
Because these pages are automatically generated, it's possible that the two variables you are viewing are in fact causually related. I take steps to prevent the obvious ones from showing on the site (I don't let data about the weather in one city correlate with the weather in a neighboring city, for example), but sometimes they still pop up. If they are related, cool! You found a loophole.
no direct connection between these variables, despite what the AI says above. This is exacerbated by the fact that I used "Years" as the base variable. Lots of things happen in a year that are not related to each other! Most studies would use something like "one person" in stead of "one year" to be the "thing" studied. - Observations not independent: For many variables, sequential years are not independent of each other. If a population of people is continuously doing something every day, there is no reason to think they would suddenly change how they are doing that thing on January 1. A simple
Personally I don't find any p-value calculation to be 'simple,' but you know what I mean.
p-value calculation does not take this into account, so mathematically it appears less probable than it really is. - Very low n: There are not many data points included in this analysis. Even if the p-value is high, we should be suspicious of using so few datapoints in a correlation.
Try it yourself
You can calculate the values on this page on your own! Try running the Python code to see the calculation results. Step 1: Download and install Python on your computer.Step 2: Open a plaintext editor like Notepad and paste the code below into it.
Step 3: Save the file as "calculate_correlation.py" in a place you will remember, like your desktop. Copy the file location to your clipboard. On Windows, you can right-click the file and click "Properties," and then copy what comes after "Location:" As an example, on my computer the location is "C:\Users\tyler\Desktop"
Step 4: Open a command line window. For example, by pressing start and typing "cmd" and them pressing enter.
Step 5: Install the required modules by typing "pip install numpy", then pressing enter, then typing "pip install scipy", then pressing enter.
Step 6: Navigate to the location where you saved the Python file by using the "cd" command. For example, I would type "cd C:\Users\tyler\Desktop" and push enter.
Step 7: Run the Python script by typing "python calculate_correlation.py"
If you run into any issues, I suggest asking ChatGPT to walk you through installing Python and running the code below on your system. Try this question:
"Walk me through installing Python on my computer to run a script that uses scipy and numpy. Go step-by-step and ask me to confirm before moving on. Start by asking me questions about my operating system so that you know how to proceed. Assume I want the simplest installation with the latest version of Python and that I do not currently have any of the necessary elements installed. Remember to only give me one step per response and confirm I have done it before proceeding."
# These modules make it easier to perform the calculation
import numpy as np
from scipy import stats
# We'll define a function that we can call to return the correlation calculations
def calculate_correlation(array1, array2):
# Calculate Pearson correlation coefficient and p-value
correlation, p_value = stats.pearsonr(array1, array2)
# Calculate R-squared as the square of the correlation coefficient
r_squared = correlation**2
return correlation, r_squared, p_value
# These are the arrays for the variables shown on this page, but you can modify them to be any two sets of numbers
array_1 = np.array([23,14024,20776,10160,22589,52876,99277,56262,])
array_2 = np.array([4,13,21,14,16,48,106,58,])
array_1_name = "Votes for Libertarian Senators in Colorado"
array_2_name = "Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags"
# Perform the calculation
print(f"Calculating the correlation between {array_1_name} and {array_2_name}...")
correlation, r_squared, p_value = calculate_correlation(array_1, array_2)
# Print the results
print("Correlation Coefficient:", correlation)
print("R-squared:", r_squared)
print("P-value:", p_value)
Reuseable content
You may re-use the images on this page for any purpose, even commercial purposes, without asking for permission. The only requirement is that you attribute Tyler Vigen. Attribution can take many different forms. If you leave the "tylervigen.com" link in the image, that satisfies it just fine. If you remove it and move it to a footnote, that's fine too. You can also just write "Charts courtesy of Tyler Vigen" at the bottom of an article.You do not need to attribute "the spurious correlations website," and you don't even need to link here if you don't want to. I don't gain anything from pageviews. There are no ads on this site, there is nothing for sale, and I am not for hire.
For the record, I am just one person. Tyler Vigen, he/him/his. I do have degrees, but they should not go after my name unless you want to annoy my wife. If that is your goal, then go ahead and cite me as "Tyler Vigen, A.A. A.A.S. B.A. J.D." Otherwise it is just "Tyler Vigen."
When spoken, my last name is pronounced "vegan," like I don't eat meat.
Full license details.
For more on re-use permissions, or to get a signed release form, see tylervigen.com/permission.
Download images for these variables:
- High resolution line chart
The image linked here is a Scalable Vector Graphic (SVG). It is the highest resolution that is possible to achieve. It scales up beyond the size of the observable universe without pixelating. You do not need to email me asking if I have a higher resolution image. I do not. The physical limitations of our universe prevent me from providing you with an image that is any higher resolution than this one.
If you insert it into a PowerPoint presentation (a tool well-known for managing things that are the scale of the universe), you can right-click > "Ungroup" or "Create Shape" and then edit the lines and text directly. You can also change the colors this way.
Alternatively you can use a tool like Inkscape. - High resolution line chart, optimized for mobile
- Alternative high resolution line chart
- Scatterplot
- Portable line chart (png)
- Portable line chart (png), optimized for mobile
- Line chart for only Votes for Libertarian Senators in Colorado
- Line chart for only Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags
- AI-generated correlation image
- The spurious research paper: Libertarian Votes and Air Bag Woes: A Political Puncture or Statistical Silliness?
I'm grateful for your review!
Correlation ID: 5786 · Black Variable ID: 26211 · Red Variable ID: 1105