Report an error
Air pollution in Boston correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
Number of edits to the Wikipedia article for Thanksgiving | r=0.92 | 15yrs | No |
Google searches for 'snoop dog' | r=0.86 | 18yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Dianna | r=0.77 | 42yrs | No |
Kerosene used in Peru | r=0.77 | 42yrs | Yes! |
Popularity of the first name Dale | r=0.77 | 42yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Thomas | r=0.76 | 42yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Matthew | r=0.76 | 42yrs | No |
Hydopower energy generated in Denmark | r=0.76 | 42yrs | No |
Burglary rates in the US | r=0.68 | 37yrs | No |
NASA's budget as a percentage of the total US Federal Budget | r=0.64 | 42yrs | No |
Average number of milk cows in the United States | r=0.62 | 42yrs | No |
Hotdogs consumed by Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion | r=-0.71 | 42yrs | No |
Air pollution in Boston 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.)