Report an error
Number of times 12 was a winning Mega Millions number correlates with...
| Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? | 
| Average temperature in Los Angeles | r=0.79 | 18yrs | No | 
| Bachelor's degrees awarded in law enforcement | r=0.77 | 10yrs | No | 
| Air quality in Oklahoma City | r=0.72 | 22yrs | No | 
| Popularity of the first name Marian | r=0.53 | 21yrs | No | 
| Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains' | r=0.48 | 20yrs | No | 
Number of times 12 was a winning Mega Millions number 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.)
