Report an error
Number of times a donut appears in a Garfield comic strip correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
Biomass power generated in Sierra Leone | r=1 | 8yrs | No |
The divorce rate in Alabama | r=0.85 | 11yrs | No |
Academy Award Best Supporting Actor Winner's Age | r=0.81 | 12yrs | No |
Google searches for 'why isnt 11 pronounced onety one' | r=0.8 | 12yrs | No |
Google searches for 'how do i stop procrastinating' | r=0.67 | 12yrs | No |
The distance between the Sun and Earth | r=0.53 | 12yrs | No |
Season wins for the Green Bay Packers | r=0.5 | 12yrs | No |
Number of times a donut appears in a Garfield comic strip 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.)