Report an error
Master's degrees awarded in Physical sciences correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
The number of professional painters in Kentucky | r=0.98 | 10yrs | Yes! |
The number of secretaries in Hawaii | r=0.97 | 10yrs | No |
The number of hairdressers, hairstylists, and cosmetologists in Florida | r=0.96 | 10yrs | No |
Google searches for 'unicorns' | r=0.91 | 10yrs | No |
Robberies in Alaska | r=0.9 | 10yrs | No |
Professor salaries in the US | r=0.88 | 10yrs | Yes! |
The distance between Jupiter and Venus | r=0.87 | 10yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Zaria | r=0.86 | 10yrs | No |
US Sales of Artificial Christmas Trees | r=0.85 | 7yrs | No |
Popularity of the 'chuck norris' meme | r=0.84 | 10yrs | No |
The number of accountants and auditors in District of Columbia | r=0.79 | 10yrs | No |
The distance between Jupiter and Earth | r=0.78 | 10yrs | No |
Master's degrees awarded in Physical sciences 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.)