Additional Info: Current total views of videos released that year.
Report an error
Average views of SmarterEveryDay YouTube videos correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
The number of postsecondary art, drama, and music teachers in Colorado | r=0.94 | 16yrs | No |
The number of biochemists and biophysicists in Minnesota | r=0.94 | 15yrs | No |
Gasoline pumped in Tajikistan | r=0.91 | 15yrs | No |
Petroluem consumption in New Caledonia | r=0.91 | 15yrs | Yes! |
Popularity of the first name Cali | r=0.9 | 16yrs | Yes! |
Popularity of the first name Callie | r=0.89 | 16yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Kali | r=0.86 | 16yrs | No |
Biomass power generated in Nigeria | r=0.85 | 15yrs | No |
Hot days in San Diego | r=0.77 | 16yrs | Yes! |
Baidu's stock price (BIDU) | r=0.73 | 17yrs | No |
The number of insurance underwriters in New York | r=-0.89 | 16yrs | No |
Average views of SmarterEveryDay YouTube videos 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.)