Spurious correlation #5,935 · View random
A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is The number of tax examiners and collectors, and revenue agents in Colorado and the second variable is Customer satisfaction with Dollar General. The chart goes from 2010 to 2020, and the two variables track closely in value over that time.

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is The number of tax examiners and collectors, and revenue agents in Colorado and the second variable is Customer satisfaction with Dollar General. The chart goes from 2010 to 2020, and the two variables track closely in value over that time.

AI explanation

The shortage of tax professionals led to a surplus of loose change in Colorado, prompting customers to realize they were being shortchanged at Dollar General.

^{Show image generation prompt} Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie, depicting a colorful, small-town Dollar General store in Colorado. A line of diverse, relatable customers with concerned expressions stand at the checkout, counting their change with furrowed brows, realizing they have been shortchanged. Behind them, a group of quirky tax examiners and collectors are frantically counting piles of loose change as they work to address the shortage, adding an element of animated chaos and humor to the scene. The setting should be warm and inviting, with attention to creating vivid characters and expressive facial features. 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: The number of tax examiners and collectors, and revenue agents in Colorado and Customer satisfaction with Dollar General. 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 funny image you would see on reddit 3D Pixar Style Sci-fi fantacy Photorealism An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie
ChatGPT: An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie

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 The number of tax examiners and collectors, and revenue agents in Colorado and Customer satisfaction with Dollar General, in the following situation: The shortage of tax professionals led to a surplus of loose change in Colorado, prompting customers to realize they were being shortchanged at Dollar General.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In Colorado, a line of customers at Dollar General frowns as they count their change, realizing they have been shortchanged. In the background, a small group of tax examiners and collectors frantically count piles of loose change as they work to address the shortage.

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: [ An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie ] and depicting this scene: In Colorado, a line of customers at Dollar General frowns as they count their change, realizing they have been shortchanged. In the background, a small group of tax examiners and collectors frantically count piles of loose change as they work to address the shortage. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie, depicting a colorful, small-town Dollar General store in Colorado. A line of diverse, relatable customers with concerned expressions stand at the checkout, counting their change with furrowed brows, realizing they have been shortchanged. Behind them, a group of quirky tax examiners and collectors are frantically counting piles of loose change as they work to address the shortage, adding an element of animated chaos and humor to the scene. The setting should be warm and inviting, with attention to creating vivid characters and expressive facial features.

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

I sequence the requests into multiple prompts because I find GPT 3.5 to perform much better with short, well-managed contexts. Thus, I track the context directly in Python and only ask ChatGPT targeted questions.
^{Show prompt for explanation} Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 (fine-tuned)
System prompt: You provide humorous responses in the form of plausible sounding explanations for correlations. You assume the correlation is causative for the purpose of the explanation even if it is ridiculous. You do not chat with the user, you only reply with the causal connection explanation and nothing else.
User prompt: Please make up a funny explanation for how a decrease in The number of tax examiners and collectors, and revenue agents in Colorado caused Customer satisfaction with Dollar General to decrease.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)

Tango of Tax Examiners and Collectors, and Revenue Agents in Colorado: Ties to Customer Contentment with Dollar General

The Journal of Financial Frolics

Jan 2024

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

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

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between The number of tax examiners and collectors, and revenue agents in Colorado and Customer satisfaction with Dollar General. 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 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]]
Tango of Tax Examiners and Collectors, and Revenue Agents in Colorado: Ties to Customer Contentment with Dollar General

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research delves into the interplay between the abundance of tax examiners and collectors, and revenue agents in the state of Colorado, and the subsequent impact on customer satisfaction with the esteemed retailer, Dollar General. By harnessing data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the American Customer Satisfaction Index spanning the years 2010 to 2020, we unveil the rather surprising correlation coefficient of 0.9054125 and p < 0.01, which lends credence to the notion that perhaps there are karmic ties between tax-related occupations and dollar store bliss. Our study not only adds empirical weight to the significance of bureaucracies in the retail therapy realm but also prompts a display of appreciation for the unsung heroes of tax administration. Who knew that the number of tax examiners and collectors, and revenue agents could contribute to customers feeling ever so jolly at Dollar General?

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The harmonious dance between tax examiners and collectors, alongside revenue agents, has long been a subject of fascination and intrigue. As heirs to the grand tradition of bureaucracy, these diligent individuals navigate the labyrinthine corridors of tax administration with an unwavering dedication to financial probity. Conversely, in the bustling realm of retail, customer satisfaction stands as a revered metric of commercial prosperity. In this paper, we traverse the intersection of these seemingly disparate domains, illuminating the curious relationship between the abundance of tax officials in Colorado and the whims of customer contentment at the venerable emporium that is Dollar General.
While the mere mention of tax examiners and collectors, and revenue agents may conjure visions of stern figures poring over spreadsheets and navigating complex tax codes, our inquiry unveils a peculiar correlation with the joyful experiences of Dollar General customers. Through meticulous analysis of data sourced from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the American Customer Satisfaction Index, we reveal a significant correlation coefficient of 0.9054125, coupled with a p-value less than 0.01. Remarkably, this compelling statistical linkage hints at an unorthodox association between the diligent efforts of tax authorities and the ebullient spirits of dollar store aficionados.
The implications of our findings extend beyond mere statistical curiosities, delving into the intricate web of human behavior, consumer psychology, and the enigmatic forces that govern retail satisfaction. In shedding light on this unexpected nexus, we pay homage to the unsung heroes of tax administration, whose influence appears to extend beyond the realm of fiscal rectitude, serendipitously intersecting with the customer experience at Dollar General. We invite readers to embark on this scholarly expedition, as we unravel the enigmatic tango of tax examiners and collectors, revenue agents, and the harmonious ripples they cast upon the tapestry of customer contentment.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The relationship between the number of tax examiners and collectors, and revenue agents and customer satisfaction with retail outlets has been a subject of limited but intriguing examination in scholarly literature. Smith et al. (2015) conducted a comprehensive analysis of tax administration staffing levels and their potential influence on consumer sentiment, albeit within the context of luxury goods retailers. Their findings suggested a nominal association, prompting further inquiry into the broader spectrum of retail establishments.

Doe and Jones (2018) echoed this sentiment, emphasizing the need for nuanced exploration of the interplay between tax-related occupations and customer contentment. Their study, while limited in scope, laid the foundation for our current investigation. Building upon these foundational studies, we aim to expand the understanding of this underexplored relationship within the domain of dollar store retail, specifically focusing on the esteemed emporium known as Dollar General.

Turning to non-fiction literature relevant to tax administration and retail satisfaction, "Tax Laws and Their Impact on Consumer Behavior" by A. Revenue (2017) portrays the intricate dynamics between tax regulations and consumer spending patterns. Meanwhile, "Retail Therapy: Unraveling the Psychology of Customer Contentment" by C. Shopaholic (2019) provides valuable insights into the emotional triggers that underpin retail satisfaction, serving as essential groundwork for our investigation.

Venturing into the realm of fiction, authors such as P. Penny-Pincher in "The Frugal Fiction: Tales of Taxing Tales" (2015) and S. Splurge in "The Dollar Detective" (2018) have woven whimsical narratives that, albeit fictional, offer a playful perspective on the intersection of tax administration and retail enchantment. These works, while not scholarly in nature, add a delightful layer of storytelling to the multifaceted relationship we aim to unravel.

In our quest for comprehensive understanding, we took the liberty of engaging with popular culture, expanding our horizons beyond the written word. "The Tax Files," a riveting television series exploring the clandestine world of tax enforcement, provided a dramatized yet insightful portrayal of the inner workings of tax examiners and collectors, resonating with our endeavor to demystify the enigmatic figures behind the bureaucratic curtain. Equally informative was the reality show "Dollar Dazzle," which delved into the retail landscape with a focus on customer satisfaction and the Dollar General experience, offering a firsthand glimpse into the dynamics of dollar store delight.

With this wide-ranging exploration spanning scholarly works, fiction, and popular media, we set the stage for our investigation into the enthralling tango of tax examiners and collectors, revenue agents, and the captivating realm of customer contentment at Dollar General.

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

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between The number of tax examiners and collectors, and revenue agents in Colorado and Customer satisfaction with Dollar General. 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 Bureau of Larbor Statistics and American Customer Satisfaction Index . You used data from 2010 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]]
Tango of Tax Examiners and Collectors, and Revenue Agents in Colorado: Ties to Customer Contentment with Dollar General

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research delves into the interplay between the abundance of tax examiners and collectors, and revenue agents in the state of Colorado, and the subsequent impact on customer satisfaction with the esteemed retailer, Dollar General. By harnessing data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the American Customer Satisfaction Index spanning the years 2010 to 2020, we unveil the rather surprising correlation coefficient of 0.9054125 and p < 0.01, which lends credence to the notion that perhaps there are karmic ties between tax-related occupations and dollar store bliss. Our study not only adds empirical weight to the significance of bureaucracies in the retail therapy realm but also prompts a display of appreciation for the unsung heroes of tax administration. Who knew that the number of tax examiners and collectors, and revenue agents could contribute to customers feeling ever so jolly at Dollar General?

[[INTRODUCTION]]
The harmonious dance between tax examiners and collectors, alongside revenue agents, has long been a subject of fascination and intrigue. As heirs to the grand tradition of bureaucracy, these diligent individuals navigate the labyrinthine corridors of tax administration with an unwavering dedication to financial probity. Conversely, in the bustling realm of retail, customer satisfaction stands as a revered metric of commercial prosperity. In this paper, we traverse the intersection of these seemingly disparate domains, illuminating the curious relationship between the abundance of tax officials in Colorado and the whims of customer contentment at the venerable emporium that is Dollar General.
While the mere mention of tax examiners and collectors, and revenue agents may conjure visions of stern figures poring over spreadsheets and navigating complex tax codes, our inquiry unveils a peculiar correlation with the joyful experiences of Dollar General customers. Through meticulous analysis of data sourced from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the American Customer Satisfaction Index, we reveal a significant correlation coefficient of 0.9054125, coupled with a p-value less than 0.01. Remarkably, this compelling statistical linkage hints at an unorthodox association between the diligent efforts of tax authorities and the ebullient spirits of dollar store aficionados.
The implications of our findings extend beyond mere statistical curiosities, delving into the intricate web of human behavior, consumer psychology, and the enigmatic forces that govern retail satisfaction. In shedding light on this unexpected nexus, we pay homage to the unsung heroes of tax administration, whose influence appears to extend beyond the realm of fiscal rectitude, serendipitously intersecting with the customer experience at Dollar General. We invite readers to embark on this scholarly expedition, as we unravel the enigmatic tango of tax examiners and collectors, revenue agents, and the harmonious ripples they cast upon the tapestry of customer contentment.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To unravel the intricacies of the intriguing connection between the proliferation of tax examiners and collectors, alongside revenue agents in Colorado, and customer satisfaction with Dollar General, our research endeavor adopted a multi-faceted approach combining quantitative analysis with a pinch of whimsy. Our data, akin to a treasure trove of statistical riches, was primarily drawn from the Bureau of Labor Statistics – a digital bastion of labor-related insights, and the American Customer Satisfaction Index, which serves as the lodestar guiding us through the varying tides of consumer contentment. The temporal scope of our inquiry spanned the illustrious years from 2010 to 2020, encapsulating a decade of fiscal ebbs and flows, retail nuances, and the gradual evolution of consumer preferences.

The first step in our methodological odyssey involved the meticulous curation of employment data pertaining to tax examiners and collectors, as well as revenue agents, from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. This laborious task necessitated sifting through an electronic menagerie of spreadsheets, charts, and datasets, akin to conducting a tax audit of digital proportions. The parameters for selection were diligently set to encompass all occupations falling within the purview of tax examination and collection, and revenue generation in the state of Colorado.

Subsequently, we sought to encapsulate the effervescent essence of customer satisfaction by tapping into the voluminous repository of data provided by the American Customer Satisfaction Index. Through this vein of information, we aspired to gauge the palpable nuances of consumer sentiment towards Dollar General, unfurling the enigmatic tapestry of retail contentment one data point at a time.

Having amassed these disparate yet tantalizingly complementary datasets, we embarked upon the statistical stratum of our research. Utilizing a combination of correlation analysis and regression models, we sought to discern the underlying patterns that might elucidate the curious bond between the number of tax examiners and collectors, and revenue agents in Colorado, and customer satisfaction with Dollar General. Each statistical iteration was accompanied by the fervent hope that perhaps, in the labyrinth of numerical abstractions, we might stumble upon a tantalizing trail of correlation, much like discovering a hidden treasure trove amidst the statistical foliage.

Furthermore, a series of robustness checks were implemented to ensure the resilience and validity of our findings. Sensitivity analyses and data manipulation exercises, conducted with the utmost care and statistical rigor, served as the bulwarks against the tempestuous tides of data variability and outliers.

In a final flourish of statistical panache, we utilized time-series analysis to capture the temporal undulations of the relationship under scrutiny. This supplementary analysis sought to unravel the evolutionary dance of tax-related occupations and customer satisfaction, akin to observing the rhythmic cadence of a waltz across the decades.

Our methodological alchemy, blending data acquisition, statistical scrutiny, and a hint of scholarly whimsy, lays the foundational framework for our subsequent unveiling of the bizarre, yet compelling, liaison between the meticulous endeavors of tax officials and the ebullient spirits traversing the aisles of Dollar General.

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

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between The number of tax examiners and collectors, and revenue agents in Colorado and Customer satisfaction with Dollar General. 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]]
Tango of Tax Examiners and Collectors, and Revenue Agents in Colorado: Ties to Customer Contentment with Dollar General

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research delves into the interplay between the abundance of tax examiners and collectors, and revenue agents in the state of Colorado, and the subsequent impact on customer satisfaction with the esteemed retailer, Dollar General. By harnessing data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the American Customer Satisfaction Index spanning the years 2010 to 2020, we unveil the rather surprising correlation coefficient of 0.9054125 and p < 0.01, which lends credence to the notion that perhaps there are karmic ties between tax-related occupations and dollar store bliss. Our study not only adds empirical weight to the significance of bureaucracies in the retail therapy realm but also prompts a display of appreciation for the unsung heroes of tax administration. Who knew that the number of tax examiners and collectors, and revenue agents could contribute to customers feeling ever so jolly at Dollar General?

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The relationship between the number of tax examiners and collectors, and revenue agents and customer satisfaction with retail outlets has been a subject of limited but intriguing examination in scholarly literature. Smith et al. (2015) conducted a comprehensive analysis of tax administration staffing levels and their potential influence on consumer sentiment, albeit within the context of luxury goods retailers. Their findings suggested a nominal association, prompting further inquiry into the broader spectrum of retail establishments.
Doe and Jones (2018) echoed this sentiment, emphasizing the need for nuanced exploration of the interplay between tax-related occupations and customer contentment. Their study, while limited in scope, laid the foundation for our current investigation. Building upon these foundational studies, we aim to expand the understanding of this underexplored relationship within the domain of dollar store retail, specifically focusing on the esteemed emporium known as Dollar General.
Turning to non-fiction literature relevant to tax administration and retail satisfaction, "Tax Laws and Their Impact on Consumer Behavior" by A. Revenue (2017) portrays the intricate dynamics between tax regulations and consumer spending patterns. Meanwhile, "Retail Therapy: Unraveling the Psychology of Customer Contentment" by C. Shopaholic (2019) provides valuable insights into the emotional triggers that underpin retail satisfaction, serving as essential groundwork for our investigation.
Venturing into the realm of fiction, authors such as P. Penny-Pincher in "The Frugal Fiction: Tales of Taxing Tales" (2015) and S. Splurge in "The Dollar Detective" (2018) have woven whimsical narratives that, albeit fictional, offer a playful perspective on the intersection of tax administration and retail enchantment. These works, while not scholarly in nature, add a delightful layer of storytelling to the multifaceted relationship we aim to unravel.
In our quest for comprehensive understanding, we took the liberty of engaging with popular culture, expanding our horizons beyond the written word. "The Tax Files," a riveting television series exploring the clandestine world of tax enforcement, provided a dramatized yet insightful portrayal of the inner workings of tax examiners and collectors, resonating with our endeavor to demystify the enigmatic figures behind the bureaucratic curtain. Equally informative was the reality show "Dollar Dazzle," which delved into the retail landscape with a focus on customer satisfaction and the Dollar General experience, offering a firsthand glimpse into the dynamics of dollar store delight.
With this wide-ranging exploration spanning scholarly works, fiction, and popular media, we set the stage for our investigation into the enthralling tango of tax examiners and collectors, revenue agents, and the captivating realm of customer contentment at Dollar General.

[[RESULTS]]
The comprehensive analysis of data spanning the years 2010 to 2020 yielded a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9054125 between the number of tax examiners and collectors, and revenue agents in Colorado, and customer satisfaction with Dollar General. This correlation was accompanied by an r-squared value of 0.8197717, indicative of the robustness of the relationship, and a p-value less than 0.01, attesting to the statistical significance of the findings. These results demonstrate a considerably strong and noteworthy association between the abundance of tax-related personnel and the contentment of Dollar General patrons.
In corroboration with these numerical insights, Figure 1 presents a scatterplot depicting the conspicuous positive relationship between the variables under scrutiny. The visual representation of the data further accentuates the compelling nature of this correlation, illustrating the synchronicity between the influx of tax examiners, collectors, and revenue agents, and the high levels of customer satisfaction at Dollar General.
The findings herein unravel a curious juxtaposition between the meticulous world of tax administration and the carefree ambiance of the dollar store realm. The results not only underscore the surprising interconnectedness of these seemingly distinct domains but also beckon us to ponder the whimsical influences that mold consumer sentiment. It appears that amidst the labyrinthine corridors of tax bureaucracy, a subtle alchemy is at play, one that resonates with the elation of Dollar General customers.
This empirical revelation may leave one intrigued by the unspoken dance of numbers and retail euphoria. Who would have thought that tax-related occupations could play a part in shaping the buoyant experiences of Dollar General patrons? The uncanny correlation between tax administrators and customer satisfaction beckons further exploration, inviting a whimsical reverie on the curiosities and caprices that underpin our consumer world.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The results of our study intricately unravel a connection that goes beyond the conventional bounds of retail dynamics. It appears that the enigmatic tango of tax examiners and collectors, as well as revenue agents, extends its influence into the cheerful world of Dollar General customers. Our findings not only substantiate the nonchalant observations made in popular culture but also the whimsical narratives of Penny-Pincher and Splurge, thereby lending empirical credence to the notion of a cosmic dance between the spheres of taxation and consumer contentment.

These results exude a magnetic allure, drawing attention to the unconventional duet of tax administration and dollar store bliss. The high correlation coefficient observed resonates with the sentiment echoed by Doe and Jones, urging a nuanced exploration of the interplay between tax-related occupations and customer satisfaction. Furthermore, the r-squared value and notably low p-value reinforce the robustness and statistical significance of our findings, affirming the substantial association between the abundance of tax examiners and collectors, and revenue agents, and the felicity of Dollar General devotees.

Intriguingly, our study traces a whimsical trajectory, aligning with the light-hearted portrayal of tax enforcement in "The Tax Files" and the exuberant retail landscape in "Dollar Dazzle." This curious convergence underscores the intricate interweaving of seemingly disparate domains and underscores the profound influence of tax-related personnel on the ebullient experiences of Dollar General patrons.

The unforeseen harmony between the meticulous world of tax administration and the carefree environs of the dollar store realm prompts a whimsical reverie on the whimsical influences shaping consumer sentiment. Our study brings to the fore the subtle alchemy oscillating between the labyrinthine corridors of tax bureaucracy and the elation of Dollar General customers, alluding to the intriguing symbiosis between the realms of taxation and retail therapy.

In essence, our results not only confirm the findings and speculations from prior studies but also serve as a testament to the serendipitous interweaving of seemingly unrelated spheres. The unspoken dance of numbers and retail euphoria beckons further scholarly inquiry, inspiring a playful contemplation on the caprices that underpin our consumer world.

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

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between The number of tax examiners and collectors, and revenue agents in Colorado and Customer satisfaction with Dollar General. 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]]
Tango of Tax Examiners and Collectors, and Revenue Agents in Colorado: Ties to Customer Contentment with Dollar General

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research delves into the interplay between the abundance of tax examiners and collectors, and revenue agents in the state of Colorado, and the subsequent impact on customer satisfaction with the esteemed retailer, Dollar General. By harnessing data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the American Customer Satisfaction Index spanning the years 2010 to 2020, we unveil the rather surprising correlation coefficient of 0.9054125 and p < 0.01, which lends credence to the notion that perhaps there are karmic ties between tax-related occupations and dollar store bliss. Our study not only adds empirical weight to the significance of bureaucracies in the retail therapy realm but also prompts a display of appreciation for the unsung heroes of tax administration. Who knew that the number of tax examiners and collectors, and revenue agents could contribute to customers feeling ever so jolly at Dollar General?

[[INTRDUCTION]]
The harmonious dance between tax examiners and collectors, alongside revenue agents, has long been a subject of fascination and intrigue. As heirs to the grand tradition of bureaucracy, these diligent individuals navigate the labyrinthine corridors of tax administration with an unwavering dedication to financial probity. Conversely, in the bustling realm of retail, customer satisfaction stands as a revered metric of commercial prosperity. In this paper, we traverse the intersection of these seemingly disparate domains, illuminating the curious relationship between the abundance of tax officials in Colorado and the whims of customer contentment at the venerable emporium that is Dollar General.
While the mere mention of tax examiners and collectors, and revenue agents may conjure visions of stern figures poring over spreadsheets and navigating complex tax codes, our inquiry unveils a peculiar correlation with the joyful experiences of Dollar General customers. Through meticulous analysis of data sourced from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the American Customer Satisfaction Index, we reveal a significant correlation coefficient of 0.9054125, coupled with a p-value less than 0.01. Remarkably, this compelling statistical linkage hints at an unorthodox association between the diligent efforts of tax authorities and the ebullient spirits of dollar store aficionados.
The implications of our findings extend beyond mere statistical curiosities, delving into the intricate web of human behavior, consumer psychology, and the enigmatic forces that govern retail satisfaction. In shedding light on this unexpected nexus, we pay homage to the unsung heroes of tax administration, whose influence appears to extend beyond the realm of fiscal rectitude, serendipitously intersecting with the customer experience at Dollar General. We invite readers to embark on this scholarly expedition, as we unravel the enigmatic tango of tax examiners and collectors, revenue agents, and the harmonious ripples they cast upon the tapestry of customer contentment.

[[RESULTS]]
The comprehensive analysis of data spanning the years 2010 to 2020 yielded a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9054125 between the number of tax examiners and collectors, and revenue agents in Colorado, and customer satisfaction with Dollar General. This correlation was accompanied by an r-squared value of 0.8197717, indicative of the robustness of the relationship, and a p-value less than 0.01, attesting to the statistical significance of the findings. These results demonstrate a considerably strong and noteworthy association between the abundance of tax-related personnel and the contentment of Dollar General patrons.
In corroboration with these numerical insights, Figure 1 presents a scatterplot depicting the conspicuous positive relationship between the variables under scrutiny. The visual representation of the data further accentuates the compelling nature of this correlation, illustrating the synchronicity between the influx of tax examiners, collectors, and revenue agents, and the high levels of customer satisfaction at Dollar General.
The findings herein unravel a curious juxtaposition between the meticulous world of tax administration and the carefree ambiance of the dollar store realm. The results not only underscore the surprising interconnectedness of these seemingly distinct domains but also beckon us to ponder the whimsical influences that mold consumer sentiment. It appears that amidst the labyrinthine corridors of tax bureaucracy, a subtle alchemy is at play, one that resonates with the elation of Dollar General customers.
This empirical revelation may leave one intrigued by the unspoken dance of numbers and retail euphoria. Who would have thought that tax-related occupations could play a part in shaping the buoyant experiences of Dollar General patrons? The uncanny correlation between tax administrators and customer satisfaction beckons further exploration, inviting a whimsical reverie on the curiosities and caprices that underpin our consumer world.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our investigation has illuminated a most unexpected nexus between the number of tax examiners and collectors, and revenue agents in Colorado and customer satisfaction with Dollar General. The remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9054125, coupled with a p-value less than 0.01, unearths a curious intertwining of tax-related occupations and the whims of dollar store delight.

This symbiotic relationship, while initially perplexing, invites a whimsical reverie on the mysterious forces that underpin our consumer world. Who would have thought that the careful calculations of tax authorities could surreptitiously contribute to the glee of Dollar General patrons? It's as if the intricate choreography of tax administration has a part to play in the harmonious retail dance, creating a peculiar tango of fiscal rectitude and customer euphoria.

As we bid adieu to this scholarly expedition, it becomes apparent that further research in this area may not yield significant breakthroughs. The unspoken dialogue between tax professionals and Dollar General enthusiasts has been unravelled, leaving us with a newfound appreciation for the enigmatic congruence of bureaucracy and retail bliss. It seems that the ever so jolly relationship between these realms is a delightful quirk of fate that warrants no further probing.

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 Tango of Tax Examiners and Collectors, and Revenue Agents in Colorado: Ties to Customer Contentment with Dollar General. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Financial Frolics

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 Tango of Tax Examiners and Collectors, and Revenue Agents in Colorado: Ties to Customer Contentment with Dollar General. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for Quirky Economics and Retail Studies

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide potential search keywords separated by commas. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide potential search keywords for a paper titled Tango of Tax Examiners and Collectors, and Revenue Agents in Colorado: Ties to Customer Contentment with Dollar General with an abstract of This research delves into the interplay between the abundance of tax examiners and collectors, and revenue agents in the state of Colorado, and the subsequent impact on customer satisfaction with the esteemed retailer, Dollar General. By harnessing data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the American Customer Satisfaction Index spanning the years 2010 to 2020, we unveil the rather surprising correlation coefficient of 0.9054125 and p < 0.01, which lends credence to the notion that perhaps there are karmic ties between tax-related occupations and dollar store bliss. Our study not only adds empirical weight to the significance of bureaucracies in the retail therapy realm but also prompts a display of appreciation for the unsung heroes of tax administration. Who knew that the number of tax examiners and collectors, and revenue agents could contribute to customers feeling ever so jolly at Dollar General?

ChatGPT:

Tango of Tax Examiners, Revenue Agents, Colorado, Customer Contentment, Dollar General, Bureau of Labor Statistics, American Customer Satisfaction Index, tax examiners, tax collectors, retail satisfaction, bureaucracy, tax administration, dollar store bliss, correlation coefficient, customer satisfaction, revenue agents

*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

The number of tax examiners and collectors, and revenue agents in Colorado
Detailed data title: BLS estimate of tax examiners and collectors, and revenue agents in Colorado
Source: Bureau of Larbor Statistics
See what else correlates with The number of tax examiners and collectors, and revenue agents in Colorado

Customer satisfaction with Dollar General
Source: American Customer Satisfaction Index
See what else correlates with Customer satisfaction with Dollar General

Correlation r = 0.9054125 (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 = 0.8197717 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 82% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Customer satisfaction with Dollar General) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., The number of tax examiners and collectors, and revenue agents in Colorado) over the 11 years from 2010 through 2020.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.00013.^Show 0.0001255415018382941600000000
The p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme.^Note More specifically the p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme if we had only tested one pair of variables one time.

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

Who is going to stop me? p-value reporting doesn't require me to report how many calculations I had to go through in order to find a low p-value!
On average, you will find a correaltion as strong as 0.91 in 0.013% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 7,965 random variables^Note Which I absolutely did.
with the same 10 degrees of freedom, ^Note Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 10 because we have two variables measured over a period of 11 years. It's just the number of years minus ( the number of variables minus one ), which in this case simplifies to the number of years minus one.
you would randomly expect to find a correlation as strong as this one.

[ 0.67, 0.98 ] 95% correlation confidence interval (using the Fisher z-transformation)
^{Read more about the confidence interval} The confidence interval is an estimate the range of the value of the correlation coefficient, using the correlation itself as an input. The values are meant to be the low and high end of the correlation coefficient with 95% confidence.

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

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

Still, sometimes one of the variables has more years of data available than the other. This page only shows the overlapping years. To see all the years, click on "See what else correlates with..." link above.

	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016	2017	2018	2019	2020
The number of tax examiners and collectors, and revenue agents in Colorado (Laborers)	760	800	770	760	710	680	800	610	590	600	600
Customer satisfaction with Dollar General (Consumer Satisfaction)	80	78	78	80	75	74	78	73	73	73	71

Why this works

Data dredging: I have 25,153 variables in my database. I compare all these variables against each other to find ones that randomly match up. That's 632,673,409 correlation calculations! This is called “data dredging.” Instead of starting with a hypothesis and testing it, I instead abused the data to see what correlations shake out. It’s a dangerous way to go about analysis, because any sufficiently large dataset will yield strong correlations completely at random.
Lack of causal connection: There is probably^Note Because these pages are automatically generated, it's possible that the two variables you are viewing are in fact causually related. I take steps to prevent the obvious ones from showing on the site (I don't let data about the weather in one city correlate with the weather in a neighboring city, for example), but sometimes they still pop up. If they are related, cool! You found a loophole.
no direct connection between these variables, despite what the AI says above. This is exacerbated by the fact that I used "Years" as the base variable. Lots of things happen in a year that are not related to each other! Most studies would use something like "one person" in stead of "one year" to be the "thing" studied.
Observations not independent: For many variables, sequential years are not independent of each other. If a population of people is continuously doing something every day, there is no reason to think they would suddenly change how they are doing that thing on January 1. A simple^Note Personally I don't find any p-value calculation to be 'simple,' but you know what I mean.
p-value calculation does not take this into account, so mathematically it appears less probable than it really is.

Try it yourself

You can calculate the values on this page on your own! Try running the Python code to see the calculation results. ^{Show the steps to do this.} Step 1: Download and install Python on your computer.

Step 2: Open a plaintext editor like Notepad and paste the code below into it.

Step 3: Save the file as "calculate_correlation.py" in a place you will remember, like your desktop. Copy the file location to your clipboard. On Windows, you can right-click the file and click "Properties," and then copy what comes after "Location:" As an example, on my computer the location is "C:\Users\tyler\Desktop"

Step 4: Open a command line window. For example, by pressing start and typing "cmd" and them pressing enter.

Step 5: Install the required modules by typing "pip install numpy", then pressing enter, then typing "pip install scipy", then pressing enter.

Step 6: Navigate to the location where you saved the Python file by using the "cd" command. For example, I would type "cd C:\Users\tyler\Desktop" and push enter.

Step 7: Run the Python script by typing "python calculate_correlation.py"

If you run into any issues, I suggest asking ChatGPT to walk you through installing Python and running the code below on your system. Try this question:

"Walk me through installing Python on my computer to run a script that uses scipy and numpy. Go step-by-step and ask me to confirm before moving on. Start by asking me questions about my operating system so that you know how to proceed. Assume I want the simplest installation with the latest version of Python and that I do not currently have any of the necessary elements installed. Remember to only give me one step per response and confirm I have done it before proceeding."

# These modules make it easier to perform the calculation
import numpy as np
from scipy import stats

# We'll define a function that we can call to return the correlation calculations
def calculate_correlation(array1, array2):

    # Calculate Pearson correlation coefficient and p-value
    correlation, p_value = stats.pearsonr(array1, array2)

    # Calculate R-squared as the square of the correlation coefficient
    r_squared = correlation**2

    return correlation, r_squared, p_value

# These are the arrays for the variables shown on this page, but you can modify them to be any two sets of numbers
array_1 = np.array([760,800,770,760,710,680,800,610,590,600,600,])
array_2 = np.array([80,78,78,80,75,74,78,73,73,73,71,])
array_1_name = "The number of tax examiners and collectors, and revenue agents in Colorado"
array_2_name = "Customer satisfaction with Dollar General"

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

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

Reuseable content

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

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

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

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

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

Download images for these variables:

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

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

Alternatively you can use a tool like Inkscape.
High resolution line chart, optimized for mobile
Alternative high resolution line chart
Scatterplot
Portable line chart (png)
Portable line chart (png), optimized for mobile
Line chart for only The number of tax examiners and collectors, and revenue agents in Colorado
Line chart for only Customer satisfaction with Dollar General
AI-generated correlation image
The spurious research paper: Tango of Tax Examiners and Collectors, and Revenue Agents in Colorado: Ties to Customer Contentment with Dollar General

View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Your correlation inspection deserves a standing ovation!

Correlation ID: 5935 · Black Variable ID: 17874 · Red Variable ID: 19849


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