Additional Info: I asked a large language model, 'On a scale of 1-10, how _______ do you think this YouTube video title is?' for every video.
Report an error
How geeky PBS Space Time YouTube video titles are correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
The number of compensation and benefits managers in Hawaii | r=1 | 6yrs | Yes! |
Caterpillar's stock price (CAT) | r=0.98 | 9yrs | No |
Vale S.A.'s stock price (VALE) | r=0.94 | 9yrs | No |
The number of private detectives in Ohio | r=0.87 | 8yrs | No |
Academy Award Best Actress Winner's Age | r=0.86 | 7yrs | No |
Google searches for 'dr pepper vs mr pibb' | r=0.75 | 9yrs | No |
xkcd comics published about programming | r=-0.97 | 9yrs | No |
How geeky PBS Space Time YouTube video titles are 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.)