Report an error
Total length of OverSimplified YouTube videos correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
The number of forensic science technicians in Georgia | r=1 | 6yrs | Yes! |
Points allowed by the Philadelphia Eagles | r=0.88 | 7yrs | No |
The number of movies Anne Hathaway appeared in | r=0.88 | 7yrs | No |
Points scored by the Seattle Seahawks | r=0.87 | 7yrs | No |
xkcd comics published about statistics | r=0.86 | 7yrs | No |
Shark attacks in the United States | r=0.83 | 7yrs | No |
Total length of OverSimplified 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.)