Report an error
Master's degrees awarded in Mathematics and statistics correlates with...
| Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
| Nuclear power generation in China | r=1 | 10yrs | Yes! |
| Google searches for 'sushi near me' | r=0.99 | 10yrs | Yes! |
| Total comments on Mark Rober YouTube videos | r=0.99 | 10yrs | No |
| Total likes of Mark Rober YouTube videos | r=0.99 | 10yrs | No |
| Google searches for 'do i need to go to the doctor' | r=0.98 | 10yrs | No |
| Solar power generated in Ghana | r=0.98 | 9yrs | No |
| The number of probation officers in Arizona | r=0.9 | 10yrs | No |
| Points scored by the Cleveland Browns | r=0.65 | 10yrs | No |
| The number of computer programmers in California | r=-0.98 | 10yrs | No |
Master's degrees awarded in Mathematics and statistics also correlates with...
<< Back to discover a correlation
You caught me! While it would be intuitive to sort only by "correlation," I have a big, weird database. If I sort only by correlation, often all the top results are from some one or two very large datasets (like the weather or labor statistics), and it overwhelms the page.
I can't show you *all* the correlations, because my database would get too large and this page would take a very long time to load. Instead I opt to show you a subset, and I sort them by a magic system score. It starts with the correlation, but penalizes variables that repeat from the same dataset. (It also gives a bonus to variables I happen to find interesting.)