about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #1,903 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is The number of ophthalmic laboratory technicians in Mississippi and the second variable is Liquefied petroleum gas used in Romania.  The chart goes from 2003 to 2021, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As ophthalmic laboratory technicians in Mississippi sharpened their precision skills, they inadvertently increased the pressure on a global scale, leading to a higher demand for Liquefied Petroleum Gas in Romania to fuel the intense vision correction machinery. Remember, when it comes to optical technicians, their work is truly eye-opening!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Create an image of a cyber folk rendition of a small town in Mississippi, where ophthalmic laboratory technicians are congregating outside a workshop, engrossed in crafting intricate eyeglasses. In the background, emphasize a truck filled with liquefied petroleum gas arriving at a nearby gas station, nestled within a setting of lush green fields and rolling hills. The scene should radiate a fusion of traditional rural elements with a futuristic cyber aesthetic. The technicians and the environment should be visually captivating yet remain faithful to the simplicity of the prompt. The depiction should include only scenes, people, and objects, it should not include text or speech bubbles.
This image generation prompt was also generated by AI, using the following sequence:

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You select one of a few potential scene descriptors that seems to go along with the variables described. You respond only with the scene descriptions provided and say nothing else.
User prompt: Here are two variables: The number of ophthalmic laboratory technicians in Mississippi and Liquefied petroleum gas used in Romania. Given these, which of the following image style descriptions seems most appropriate? Pick the one that seems to be related to one of the variables at hand. Please respond with only one of the following potential descriptions: Cute cartoon Cyber folk Cute 2D animation Scalar art Psychedelic
ChatGPT: Cyber folk

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You describe simple visual scenes that depict the two variables stated. You combine both variables into one scene.
User prompt: Please describe a visual scene that prominently depicts both The number of ophthalmic laboratory technicians in Mississippi and Liquefied petroleum gas used in Romania together. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a small town in Mississippi, a group of ophthalmic laboratory technicians gather outside a workshop, exchanging ideas and working on intricate eye glasses. In the background, a truck filled with liquefied petroleum gas pulls up to a nearby gas station, surrounded by green fields and rolling hills.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You write and improve image generation prompts for DALLE-3. You maintain the same subjects, but enhance the visuals.
User prompt: Please respond with an image generation prompt that would be likely to create an interesting visual using DALLE-3, using the following style: [ Cyber folk ] and depicting this scene: In a small town in Mississippi, a group of ophthalmic laboratory technicians gather outside a workshop, exchanging ideas and working on intricate eye glasses. In the background, a truck filled with liquefied petroleum gas pulls up to a nearby gas station, surrounded by green fields and rolling hills. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Create an image of a cyber folk rendition of a small town in Mississippi, where ophthalmic laboratory technicians are congregating outside a workshop, engrossed in crafting intricate eyeglasses. In the background, emphasize a truck filled with liquefied petroleum gas arriving at a nearby gas station, nestled within a setting of lush green fields and rolling hills. The scene should radiate a fusion of traditional rural elements with a futuristic cyber aesthetic. The technicians and the environment should be visually captivating yet remain faithful to the simplicity of the prompt.

*Variations in the User Prompts from chart to chart are just the result of random number generation in Python. I wrote a few arrays of various styles and methods to ask questions to change up the results. Every time this site writes an explanation or generates an image, the script picks from each at random.

I sequence the requests into multiple prompts because I find GPT 3.5 to perform much better with short, well-managed contexts. Thus, I track the context directly in Python and only ask ChatGPT targeted questions.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 (fine-tuned)
System prompt: You provide humorous responses in the form of plausible sounding explanations for correlations. You assume the correlation is causative for the purpose of the explanation even if it is ridiculous. You do not chat with the user, you only reply with the causal connection explanation and nothing else.
User prompt: Please make up a funny explanation for how an increase in The number of ophthalmic laboratory technicians in Mississippi caused Liquefied petroleum gas used in Romania to increase. Add a funny one-liner at the end.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Peering through the Corneal Connection: Ophthalmic Occupations and Oil Usage

The Journal of Optometric Oil Ordinance

Jan 2024

Reminder: This paper is AI-generated. Not real!
Quick note: This sequence is long and repetitive. That's how the prompt engineering works for this one. I manage the output in Python to format it into this PDF.




Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a researcher writing an academic paper.You write titles and abstracts of goofy academic research papers.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, and add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between The number of ophthalmic laboratory technicians in Mississippi and Liquefied petroleum gas used in Romania. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Make the title an alliteration.

Your research team used data from Bureau of Larbor Statistics and Energy Information Administration to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.8722852 and p < 0.01 for 2003 to 2021.

Please respond in this format (replace "Lorem ipsum dolor sit" with your title and abstract)

[[TITLE]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit

[[ABSTRACT]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit



ChatGPT:
[[TITLE]]
Peering through the Corneal Connection: Ophthalmic Occupations and Oil Usage

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the enigmatic correlation between the number of ophthalmic laboratory technicians in Mississippi and liquefied petroleum gas used in Romania. Harnessing datasets from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Energy Information Administration, our research team uncovered a surprising connection that captivated both the optical and energy sectors. Our analysis yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.8722852 with a significance level of p < 0.01 for the years spanning 2003 to 2021. While the specifics of this association may seem as fuzzy as a pair of out-of-focus spectacles, our findings shed light on a peculiar intersection between ocular occupations and oil consumption. Join us as we peer into this Corneal Connection, where the lenses of labor statistics converge with the fuel of fascination.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a researcher writing an academic paper.You draft the introduction section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between The number of ophthalmic laboratory technicians in Mississippi and Liquefied petroleum gas used in Romania. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Peering through the Corneal Connection: Ophthalmic Occupations and Oil Usage

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the enigmatic correlation between the number of ophthalmic laboratory technicians in Mississippi and liquefied petroleum gas used in Romania. Harnessing datasets from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Energy Information Administration, our research team uncovered a surprising connection that captivated both the optical and energy sectors. Our analysis yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.8722852 with a significance level of p < 0.01 for the years spanning 2003 to 2021. While the specifics of this association may seem as fuzzy as a pair of out-of-focus spectacles, our findings shed light on a peculiar intersection between ocular occupations and oil consumption. Join us as we peer into this Corneal Connection, where the lenses of labor statistics converge with the fuel of fascination.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

The intersection of ophthalmic occupations and oil consumption may seem like an unlikely pairing at first glance, akin to mixing eyeballs and gasoline – not the most conventional cocktail. However, as we delve into the depths of this research, we uncover a connection that is as clear as 20/20 vision (or perhaps at least 20/40). With a twinkle in our eyes and a spark of curiosity, we set out to explore the mysterious link between the number of ophthalmic laboratory technicians in Mississippi and the consumption of liquefied petroleum gas in Romania.

Ophthalmic laboratory technicians, also known as "masters of glasses" in some circles, play a crucial role in crafting eyewear that helps individuals see the world in all its optical glory. Meanwhile, liquefied petroleum gas, also known as LPG, fuels a multitude of activities, from cooking up delectable dishes to powering vehicles and heating homes. One may ponder: what could possibly tie these two seemingly disparate entities together? Well, dear reader, as we embark on this academic journey, we aim to navigate through the labyrinth of data and statistical analyses to unearth the peculiar correlation between these two domains.

And so, without further ado, let us embark on an intellectual adventure as we peer through the corneal connection, where the realms of ophthalmic occupations and oil usage converge in a spectacle of statistical significance. As we navigate this terrain, we hope to shed light on this unexpected nexus, while maintaining a keen eye for detail and, of course, the occasional optical pun.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a researcher writing an academic paper.You draft a literature review section of an academic research paper, that starts out dry for the first few sentences but then becomes hilarious and goofy.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between The number of ophthalmic laboratory technicians in Mississippi and Liquefied petroleum gas used in Romania. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Speak in the present tense for this section (the authors find...), as is common in academic research paper literature reviews. Name the sources in a format similar to this: In "Book," the authors find lorem and ipsum.

Make up the lorem and ipsum part, but make it sound related to the topic at hand.

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then devolve ever further, and mention something completely ridiculous, like you conducted literature review by reading the backs of shampoo bottles.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Peering through the Corneal Connection: Ophthalmic Occupations and Oil Usage

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the enigmatic correlation between the number of ophthalmic laboratory technicians in Mississippi and liquefied petroleum gas used in Romania. Harnessing datasets from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Energy Information Administration, our research team uncovered a surprising connection that captivated both the optical and energy sectors. Our analysis yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.8722852 with a significance level of p < 0.01 for the years spanning 2003 to 2021. While the specifics of this association may seem as fuzzy as a pair of out-of-focus spectacles, our findings shed light on a peculiar intersection between ocular occupations and oil consumption. Join us as we peer into this Corneal Connection, where the lenses of labor statistics converge with the fuel of fascination.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The intersection of ophthalmic occupations and oil consumption may seem like an unlikely pairing at first glance, akin to mixing eyeballs and gasoline – not the most conventional cocktail. However, as we delve into the depths of this research, we uncover a connection that is as clear as 20/20 vision (or perhaps at least 20/40). With a twinkle in our eyes and a spark of curiosity, we set out to explore the mysterious link between the number of ophthalmic laboratory technicians in Mississippi and the consumption of liquefied petroleum gas in Romania.
Ophthalmic laboratory technicians, also known as "masters of glasses" in some circles, play a crucial role in crafting eyewear that helps individuals see the world in all its optical glory. Meanwhile, liquefied petroleum gas, also known as LPG, fuels a multitude of activities, from cooking up delectable dishes to powering vehicles and heating homes. One may ponder: what could possibly tie these two seemingly disparate entities together? Well, dear reader, as we embark on this academic journey, we aim to navigate through the labyrinth of data and statistical analyses to unearth the peculiar correlation between these two domains.
And so, without further ado, let us embark on an intellectual adventure as we peer through the corneal connection, where the realms of ophthalmic occupations and oil usage converge in a spectacle of statistical significance. As we navigate this terrain, we hope to shed light on this unexpected nexus, while maintaining a keen eye for detail and, of course, the occasional optical pun.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

In considering the intersection of ophthalmic occupations and oil usage, the scholarly pursuit of correlations and interconnections has led to a myriad of studies. Within the realm of ophthalmic labor statistics, Smith (2015) provides a comprehensive analysis of occupational trends in the eyewear industry, while Doe (2018) examines the impact of technological advancements on the demand for ophthalmic laboratory technicians. Jones (2020) delves into the geographic distribution of eye care professionals, offering insights into regional disparities and their potential implications.

Turning to the domain of energy consumption, "Energy Trends and the Global Economy" by Brown (2019) presents an extensive exploration of energy usage patterns across various nations. Additionally, "Petroleum Perspectives" by Green (2017) offers a detailed overview of the utilization of liquefied petroleum gas in different sectors, spanning from residential to industrial applications.

Shifting gears to fictional literature with a tangential connection, "The Eye of the World" by Robert Jordan may at first blush seem thematically aligned, yet it regrettably diverges from our focus on ophthalmic occupations and oil usage. Similarly, "Oil!" by Upton Sinclair encapsulates a narrative rich with petroleum-centered themes but authentically neglects the entwined spectacle of ophthalmic labor statistics.

Further delving into the literary world, it is imperative to recognize the overlooked repository of knowledge that exists beyond academic tomes. Consequently, the authors undertook an exhaustive investigation that extended to curious corners of bibliophilic oddity. Lest it be discounted, the quaint adages adorning the packaging of herbal teas, the enigmatic quandaries stitched into "Choose Your Own Adventure" novels, and indeed, the minutiae inscribed upon the backs of shampoo bottles have all contributed to this comprehensive review, albeit in a more unconventional manner.

With these diverse sources informing our inquiry, we are prepared to embark on an exploration that transcends convention, motivated by the pursuit of understanding amidst the enigmatic correlation between the number of ophthalmic laboratory technicians in Mississippi and the consumption of liquefied petroleum gas in Romania.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a researcher writing an academic paper.You draft the methodology section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between The number of ophthalmic laboratory technicians in Mississippi and Liquefied petroleum gas used in Romania. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Bureau of Larbor Statistics and Energy Information Administration . You used data from 2003 to 2021

Make up the research methods you don't know. Make them a bit goofy and convoluted.

Here is the title, abstract, and introduction of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Peering through the Corneal Connection: Ophthalmic Occupations and Oil Usage

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the enigmatic correlation between the number of ophthalmic laboratory technicians in Mississippi and liquefied petroleum gas used in Romania. Harnessing datasets from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Energy Information Administration, our research team uncovered a surprising connection that captivated both the optical and energy sectors. Our analysis yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.8722852 with a significance level of p < 0.01 for the years spanning 2003 to 2021. While the specifics of this association may seem as fuzzy as a pair of out-of-focus spectacles, our findings shed light on a peculiar intersection between ocular occupations and oil consumption. Join us as we peer into this Corneal Connection, where the lenses of labor statistics converge with the fuel of fascination.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
The intersection of ophthalmic occupations and oil consumption may seem like an unlikely pairing at first glance, akin to mixing eyeballs and gasoline – not the most conventional cocktail. However, as we delve into the depths of this research, we uncover a connection that is as clear as 20/20 vision (or perhaps at least 20/40). With a twinkle in our eyes and a spark of curiosity, we set out to explore the mysterious link between the number of ophthalmic laboratory technicians in Mississippi and the consumption of liquefied petroleum gas in Romania.
Ophthalmic laboratory technicians, also known as "masters of glasses" in some circles, play a crucial role in crafting eyewear that helps individuals see the world in all its optical glory. Meanwhile, liquefied petroleum gas, also known as LPG, fuels a multitude of activities, from cooking up delectable dishes to powering vehicles and heating homes. One may ponder: what could possibly tie these two seemingly disparate entities together? Well, dear reader, as we embark on this academic journey, we aim to navigate through the labyrinth of data and statistical analyses to unearth the peculiar correlation between these two domains.
And so, without further ado, let us embark on an intellectual adventure as we peer through the corneal connection, where the realms of ophthalmic occupations and oil usage converge in a spectacle of statistical significance. As we navigate this terrain, we hope to shed light on this unexpected nexus, while maintaining a keen eye for detail and, of course, the occasional optical pun.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

Data Collection:
The initial step in our endeavor involved gathering data from multiple sources, which, at times, felt like searching for a needle in a haystack, or perhaps more accurately, a contact lens lost in shag carpeting. Our primary sources of information were the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Energy Information Administration, where we unearthed datasets pertaining to the number of ophthalmic laboratory technicians in Mississippi and the usage of liquefied petroleum gas in Romania. As the saying goes, we left no webpage unturned in our pursuit of these peculiar statistics.

Selection Criteria:
To ensure the validity and reliability of the data, we only considered information from the years 2003 to 2021, because, well, let's be honest, who knows what kind of wild and wacky occurrences could have skewed the numbers before 2003? Furthermore, we exclusively focused on the number of ophthalmic laboratory technicians and the consumption of liquefied petroleum gas, filtering out any extraneous distractions like the number of optometrists or the usage of solid petroleum (for all the die-hard fans of rock-solid fuel, we apologize for its exclusion).

Statistical Analysis:
Once the data were corralled and scrubbed cleaner than a pair of freshly polished bifocals, we employed a correlation analysis to explore the potential relationship between these two seemingly unrelated variables. While the process of statistical analysis can certainly induce eye strain, both literally and figuratively, we soldiered on, armed with our trusty calculators and a determination as strong as the prescription of a pair of reading glasses for a voracious bookworm.

Ethical Considerations:
Throughout this research, we adhered to the highest standards of integrity, ensuring that the privacy and confidentiality of all statistical figures were meticulously maintained. Furthermore, we approached our exploration with a spirit of scientific inquiry, without any bias toward either ophthalmic laboratory technicians or the enthusiasts of liquefied petroleum gas.

In conclusion, our methodology took us on a journey akin to exploring the depths of an optical illusion, where data amalgamated to reveal a correlation as fascinating and unexpected as spotting a memorable optical illusion in a slice of toast. With our methodology firmly in place, we plunged into the realm of analysis, driven by the curiosity and zeal of a dedicated researcher with a taste for the unconventional.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a researcher writing an academic paper.You draft the results section of an academic research paper. You speak in the past tense (you found...).
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between The number of ophthalmic laboratory technicians in Mississippi and Liquefied petroleum gas used in Romania. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Bureau of Larbor Statistics and Energy Information Administration .

For the time period 2003 to 2021, you found a correlation 0.8722852, r-squared of 0.7608815, and p < 0.01.

One figure will be included. The figure (Fig. 1) is a scatterplot showing the strong correlation between the two variables. You don't need to specify where; I will add the figure.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Peering through the Corneal Connection: Ophthalmic Occupations and Oil Usage

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the enigmatic correlation between the number of ophthalmic laboratory technicians in Mississippi and liquefied petroleum gas used in Romania. Harnessing datasets from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Energy Information Administration, our research team uncovered a surprising connection that captivated both the optical and energy sectors. Our analysis yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.8722852 with a significance level of p < 0.01 for the years spanning 2003 to 2021. While the specifics of this association may seem as fuzzy as a pair of out-of-focus spectacles, our findings shed light on a peculiar intersection between ocular occupations and oil consumption. Join us as we peer into this Corneal Connection, where the lenses of labor statistics converge with the fuel of fascination.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
The intersection of ophthalmic occupations and oil consumption may seem like an unlikely pairing at first glance, akin to mixing eyeballs and gasoline – not the most conventional cocktail. However, as we delve into the depths of this research, we uncover a connection that is as clear as 20/20 vision (or perhaps at least 20/40). With a twinkle in our eyes and a spark of curiosity, we set out to explore the mysterious link between the number of ophthalmic laboratory technicians in Mississippi and the consumption of liquefied petroleum gas in Romania.
Ophthalmic laboratory technicians, also known as "masters of glasses" in some circles, play a crucial role in crafting eyewear that helps individuals see the world in all its optical glory. Meanwhile, liquefied petroleum gas, also known as LPG, fuels a multitude of activities, from cooking up delectable dishes to powering vehicles and heating homes. One may ponder: what could possibly tie these two seemingly disparate entities together? Well, dear reader, as we embark on this academic journey, we aim to navigate through the labyrinth of data and statistical analyses to unearth the peculiar correlation between these two domains.
And so, without further ado, let us embark on an intellectual adventure as we peer through the corneal connection, where the realms of ophthalmic occupations and oil usage converge in a spectacle of statistical significance. As we navigate this terrain, we hope to shed light on this unexpected nexus, while maintaining a keen eye for detail and, of course, the occasional optical pun.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The pursuit of understanding the elusive correlation between the number of ophthalmic laboratory technicians in Mississippi and the consumption of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) in Romania has yielded intriguing results. Our data analysis revealed a significant positive correlation of 0.8722852 between these seemingly unrelated variables, with an r-squared value of 0.7608815 and a p-value less than 0.01. To put it simply, our findings indicate that as the number of ophthalmic technicians in Mississippi increases, there is a corresponding rise in the usage of LPG in Romania. It's almost as if the spectacles crafted by these technicians are providing a clearer view of the path to increased LPG consumption halfway across the globe!

Fig. 1 displays a scatterplot illustrating the robust correlation between the number of ophthalmic laboratory technicians and LPG usage. As we gaze upon this visual representation, it's as if the dots on the plot form an optometrist's eye chart, with each point signaling a distinct level of correlation. While this connection may seem as unexpected as finding a pair of bifocals in a gas station, our findings provide compelling evidence of this association between ophthalmic occupations and oil usage.

Overall, our results invite further exploration into the mechanisms underlying this correlation, prompting us to peer deeper into the enigmatic intersection of ocular occupations and energy consumption. As we move forward, we aim to not only uncover the underlying factors driving this correlation but also to maintain a keen eye for detail and the occasional pun, because after all, a bit of humor can make even the driest academic paper a sight for sore eyes.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a researcher writing an academic paper.You draft the discussion section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between The number of ophthalmic laboratory technicians in Mississippi and Liquefied petroleum gas used in Romania. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Limit your response to 500 tokens.

Here are the title, abstract, literature review, and results sections. Please harken back to 1-2 of the goofy items in the literature review, but pretend to take them completely seriously. Discuss how your results supported the prior research.

Do not write a conclusion. I will add a conclusion after this.

[[TITLE]]
Peering through the Corneal Connection: Ophthalmic Occupations and Oil Usage

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the enigmatic correlation between the number of ophthalmic laboratory technicians in Mississippi and liquefied petroleum gas used in Romania. Harnessing datasets from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Energy Information Administration, our research team uncovered a surprising connection that captivated both the optical and energy sectors. Our analysis yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.8722852 with a significance level of p < 0.01 for the years spanning 2003 to 2021. While the specifics of this association may seem as fuzzy as a pair of out-of-focus spectacles, our findings shed light on a peculiar intersection between ocular occupations and oil consumption. Join us as we peer into this Corneal Connection, where the lenses of labor statistics converge with the fuel of fascination.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
In considering the intersection of ophthalmic occupations and oil usage, the scholarly pursuit of correlations and interconnections has led to a myriad of studies. Within the realm of ophthalmic labor statistics, Smith (2015) provides a comprehensive analysis of occupational trends in the eyewear industry, while Doe (2018) examines the impact of technological advancements on the demand for ophthalmic laboratory technicians. Jones (2020) delves into the geographic distribution of eye care professionals, offering insights into regional disparities and their potential implications.
Turning to the domain of energy consumption, "Energy Trends and the Global Economy" by Brown (2019) presents an extensive exploration of energy usage patterns across various nations. Additionally, "Petroleum Perspectives" by Green (2017) offers a detailed overview of the utilization of liquefied petroleum gas in different sectors, spanning from residential to industrial applications.
Shifting gears to fictional literature with a tangential connection, "The Eye of the World" by Robert Jordan may at first blush seem thematically aligned, yet it regrettably diverges from our focus on ophthalmic occupations and oil usage. Similarly, "Oil!" by Upton Sinclair encapsulates a narrative rich with petroleum-centered themes but authentically neglects the entwined spectacle of ophthalmic labor statistics.
Further delving into the literary world, it is imperative to recognize the overlooked repository of knowledge that exists beyond academic tomes. Consequently, the authors undertook an exhaustive investigation that extended to curious corners of bibliophilic oddity. Lest it be discounted, the quaint adages adorning the packaging of herbal teas, the enigmatic quandaries stitched into "Choose Your Own Adventure" novels, and indeed, the minutiae inscribed upon the backs of shampoo bottles have all contributed to this comprehensive review, albeit in a more unconventional manner.
With these diverse sources informing our inquiry, we are prepared to embark on an exploration that transcends convention, motivated by the pursuit of understanding amidst the enigmatic correlation between the number of ophthalmic laboratory technicians in Mississippi and the consumption of liquefied petroleum gas in Romania.

[[RESULTS]]
The pursuit of understanding the elusive correlation between the number of ophthalmic laboratory technicians in Mississippi and the consumption of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) in Romania has yielded intriguing results. Our data analysis revealed a significant positive correlation of 0.8722852 between these seemingly unrelated variables, with an r-squared value of 0.7608815 and a p-value less than 0.01. To put it simply, our findings indicate that as the number of ophthalmic technicians in Mississippi increases, there is a corresponding rise in the usage of LPG in Romania. It's almost as if the spectacles crafted by these technicians are providing a clearer view of the path to increased LPG consumption halfway across the globe!
Fig. 1 displays a scatterplot illustrating the robust correlation between the number of ophthalmic laboratory technicians and LPG usage. As we gaze upon this visual representation, it's as if the dots on the plot form an optometrist's eye chart, with each point signaling a distinct level of correlation. While this connection may seem as unexpected as finding a pair of bifocals in a gas station, our findings provide compelling evidence of this association between ophthalmic occupations and oil usage.
Overall, our results invite further exploration into the mechanisms underlying this correlation, prompting us to peer deeper into the enigmatic intersection of ocular occupations and energy consumption. As we move forward, we aim to not only uncover the underlying factors driving this correlation but also to maintain a keen eye for detail and the occasional pun, because after all, a bit of humor can make even the driest academic paper a sight for sore eyes.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The intriguing correlation unearthed between the number of ophthalmic laboratory technicians in Mississippi and the consumption of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) in Romania evokes a curiosity as captivating as a pair of mesmerizing bifocals. This study endeavors to unravel the veil of enigma shrouding this unlikely convergence, akin to delicately polishing the lenses of a telescope to reveal celestial wonders previously obscured from sight.

Our findings, supported by the prior research of Smith (2015) and Doe (2018) delving into occupational trends and technological impacts in the eyewear industry, lend credence to the unexpected connection we've uncovered. As if the lens of a microscope has brought these obscure correlations into focus, our results align with the literature, illuminating the intertwining relationship between the optical labor force in Mississippi and the utilization of LPG in Romania.

Taking a tongue-in-cheek nod to the literary allusions peppered throughout the literature review, it is as if our research has uncovered the hidden "Eye of the World" in the unexpected pairing of ophthalmic occupations and oil usage. This uncanny correlation, much like a twist in a plot, adds a layer of complexity akin to the unpredictable intrigue of a "Choose Your Own Adventure" novel, unraveling an unexpected narrative thread within the annals of occupational and energy research.

Embracing the lighthearted spirit of our literature review's offbeat approach, it's almost as if the whimsical adages on tea packaging and the enigmatic quandaries of fictional narratives have led us down a crooked path to the unlikely discovery of this intriguing correlation. However, much like the hidden wisdom found in unexpected places, our findings highlight the importance of embracing unconventional sources of knowledge in expanding the boundaries of academic inquiry.

As we embrace the levity woven into the fabric of our academic prose, we remain firmly grounded in the empirical robustness of our results, which draw attention to the need for further inquiry into the underlying mechanisms driving this correlation. With a keen eye for detail and the occasional pun, we shall endeavor to navigate the entwined spectacle of ophthalmic occupations and oil usage, acknowledging that a bit of humor can indeed make an otherwise dry academic paper a sight for sore eyes.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a researcher writing an academic paper.You draft the discussion section of goofy academic research papers that sounds like it belongs based on the title and abstract provided.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between The number of ophthalmic laboratory technicians in Mississippi and Liquefied petroleum gas used in Romania. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Limit your response to 300 tokens. At the very end, assert that no more research is needed in this area.

Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
Peering through the Corneal Connection: Ophthalmic Occupations and Oil Usage

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the enigmatic correlation between the number of ophthalmic laboratory technicians in Mississippi and liquefied petroleum gas used in Romania. Harnessing datasets from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Energy Information Administration, our research team uncovered a surprising connection that captivated both the optical and energy sectors. Our analysis yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.8722852 with a significance level of p < 0.01 for the years spanning 2003 to 2021. While the specifics of this association may seem as fuzzy as a pair of out-of-focus spectacles, our findings shed light on a peculiar intersection between ocular occupations and oil consumption. Join us as we peer into this Corneal Connection, where the lenses of labor statistics converge with the fuel of fascination.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
The intersection of ophthalmic occupations and oil consumption may seem like an unlikely pairing at first glance, akin to mixing eyeballs and gasoline – not the most conventional cocktail. However, as we delve into the depths of this research, we uncover a connection that is as clear as 20/20 vision (or perhaps at least 20/40). With a twinkle in our eyes and a spark of curiosity, we set out to explore the mysterious link between the number of ophthalmic laboratory technicians in Mississippi and the consumption of liquefied petroleum gas in Romania.
Ophthalmic laboratory technicians, also known as "masters of glasses" in some circles, play a crucial role in crafting eyewear that helps individuals see the world in all its optical glory. Meanwhile, liquefied petroleum gas, also known as LPG, fuels a multitude of activities, from cooking up delectable dishes to powering vehicles and heating homes. One may ponder: what could possibly tie these two seemingly disparate entities together? Well, dear reader, as we embark on this academic journey, we aim to navigate through the labyrinth of data and statistical analyses to unearth the peculiar correlation between these two domains.
And so, without further ado, let us embark on an intellectual adventure as we peer through the corneal connection, where the realms of ophthalmic occupations and oil usage converge in a spectacle of statistical significance. As we navigate this terrain, we hope to shed light on this unexpected nexus, while maintaining a keen eye for detail and, of course, the occasional optical pun.

[[RESULTS]]
The pursuit of understanding the elusive correlation between the number of ophthalmic laboratory technicians in Mississippi and the consumption of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) in Romania has yielded intriguing results. Our data analysis revealed a significant positive correlation of 0.8722852 between these seemingly unrelated variables, with an r-squared value of 0.7608815 and a p-value less than 0.01. To put it simply, our findings indicate that as the number of ophthalmic technicians in Mississippi increases, there is a corresponding rise in the usage of LPG in Romania. It's almost as if the spectacles crafted by these technicians are providing a clearer view of the path to increased LPG consumption halfway across the globe!
Fig. 1 displays a scatterplot illustrating the robust correlation between the number of ophthalmic laboratory technicians and LPG usage. As we gaze upon this visual representation, it's as if the dots on the plot form an optometrist's eye chart, with each point signaling a distinct level of correlation. While this connection may seem as unexpected as finding a pair of bifocals in a gas station, our findings provide compelling evidence of this association between ophthalmic occupations and oil usage.
Overall, our results invite further exploration into the mechanisms underlying this correlation, prompting us to peer deeper into the enigmatic intersection of ocular occupations and energy consumption. As we move forward, we aim to not only uncover the underlying factors driving this correlation but also to maintain a keen eye for detail and the occasional pun, because after all, a bit of humor can make even the driest academic paper a sight for sore eyes.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our research has brought to light a rather eye-catching correlation between the number of ophthalmic laboratory technicians in Mississippi and the consumption of liquefied petroleum gas in Romania. The interconnectedness of these seemingly unrelated variables has left us seeing the world through a new lens – or perhaps, a pair of bifocals, given the multi-faceted nature of this association. Our findings, akin to a bright beacon in the academic landscape, beckon further investigation into this peculiar correlation. However, it seems that we have peeled back enough layers of this intriguing onion for now.
With a nod to the optical world and a wink to the realm of energy consumption, we assert that, for the time being, no further research is needed in this particular area. It appears that we have gained a clearer picture of this corneal connection, leaving us with a twinkle in our eyes and a satisfied sense of closure. Let's bid adieu to this curious exploration and set our sights on new intellectual frontiers, where the unexpected may yet again unfold before our very eyes.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of academic journals. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding research, scientific, or academic journal that would publish a paper entited Peering through the Corneal Connection: Ophthalmic Occupations and Oil Usage. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Optometric Oil Ordinance


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of nonprofit research organizations and associations. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding nonprofit, academic, or scientific association or organization that would sponsor research that resulted in a paper entited Peering through the Corneal Connection: Ophthalmic Occupations and Oil Usage. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Institute for Ocular Occupational Studies


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide potential search keywords separated by commas. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide potential search keywords for a paper titled Peering through the Corneal Connection: Ophthalmic Occupations and Oil Usage with an abstract of This study delves into the enigmatic correlation between the number of ophthalmic laboratory technicians in Mississippi and liquefied petroleum gas used in Romania. Harnessing datasets from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Energy Information Administration, our research team uncovered a surprising connection that captivated both the optical and energy sectors. Our analysis yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.8722852 with a significance level of p < 0.01 for the years spanning 2003 to 2021. While the specifics of this association may seem as fuzzy as a pair of out-of-focus spectacles, our findings shed light on a peculiar intersection between ocular occupations and oil consumption. Join us as we peer into this Corneal Connection, where the lenses of labor statistics converge with the fuel of fascination.

ChatGPT:

ophthalmic laboratory technicians, oil consumption, correlation, energy sectors, Mississippi, Romania, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Energy Information Administration, correlation coefficient, significance level, optical occupations, petroleum gas, oil usage, labor statistics

*There is a bunch of Python happening behind the scenes to turn this prompt sequence into a PDF.



Random correlation

Discover a new correlation

View all correlations

View all research papers

Report an error


Data details

The number of ophthalmic laboratory technicians in Mississippi
Detailed data title: BLS estimate of ophthalmic laboratory technicians in Mississippi
Source: Bureau of Larbor Statistics
See what else correlates with The number of ophthalmic laboratory technicians in Mississippi

Liquefied petroleum gas used in Romania
Detailed data title: Volume of liquefied petroleum gas used consumed in Romania in millions of barrels per day
Source: Energy Information Administration
See what else correlates with Liquefied petroleum gas used in Romania

Correlation r = 0.8722852 (Pearson correlation coefficient)
Correlation is a measure of how much the variables move together. If it is 0.99, when one goes up the other goes up. If it is 0.02, the connection is very weak or non-existent. If it is -0.99, then when one goes up the other goes down. If it is 1.00, you probably messed up your correlation function.

r2 = 0.7608815 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 76.1% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Liquefied petroleum gas used in Romania) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., The number of ophthalmic laboratory technicians in Mississippi) over the 19 years from 2003 through 2021.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 1.1E-6. 0.0000011244745864026061000000
The p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme. More specifically the p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme if we had only tested one pair of variables one time.

But I am a p-villain. I absolutely did not test only one pair of variables one time. I correlated hundreds of millions of pairs of variables. I threw boatloads of data into an industrial-sized blender to find this correlation.

Who is going to stop me? p-value reporting doesn't require me to report how many calculations I had to go through in order to find a low p-value!
On average, you will find a correaltion as strong as 0.87 in 0.00011% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 889,304 random variables You don't actually need 889 thousand variables to find a correlation like this one. I don't have that many variables in my database. You can also correlate variables that are not independent. I do this a lot.

p-value calculations are useful for understanding the probability of a result happening by chance. They are most useful when used to highlight the risk of a fluke outcome. For example, if you calculate a p-value of 0.30, the risk that the result is a fluke is high. It is good to know that! But there are lots of ways to get a p-value of less than 0.01, as evidenced by this project.

In this particular case, the values are so extreme as to be meaningless. That's why no one reports p-values with specificity after they drop below 0.01.

Just to be clear: I'm being completely transparent about the calculations. There is no math trickery. This is just how statistics shakes out when you calculate hundreds of millions of random correlations.
with the same 18 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 18 because we have two variables measured over a period of 19 years. It's just the number of years minus ( the number of variables minus one ), which in this case simplifies to the number of years minus one.
you would randomly expect to find a correlation as strong as this one.

[ 0.69, 0.95 ] 95% correlation confidence interval (using the Fisher z-transformation)
The confidence interval is an estimate the range of the value of the correlation coefficient, using the correlation itself as an input. The values are meant to be the low and high end of the correlation coefficient with 95% confidence.

This one is a bit more complciated than the other calculations, but I include it because many people have been pushing for confidence intervals instead of p-value calculations (for example: NEJM. However, if you are dredging data, you can reliably find yourself in the 5%. That's my goal!


All values for the years included above: If I were being very sneaky, I could trim years from the beginning or end of the datasets to increase the correlation on some pairs of variables. I don't do that because there are already plenty of correlations in my database without monkeying with the years.

Still, sometimes one of the variables has more years of data available than the other. This page only shows the overlapping years. To see all the years, click on "See what else correlates with..." link above.
2003200420052006200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172018201920202021
The number of ophthalmic laboratory technicians in Mississippi (Laborers)50170430440430310350320250180220190210250220170160180250
Liquefied petroleum gas used in Romania (Million Barrels/Day)11.262512.774121.097820.354723.517618.136420.363815.338515.737213.840514.222915.7747141416.907416.780315.826813.824715.2836




Why this works

  1. Data dredging: I have 25,153 variables in my database. I compare all these variables against each other to find ones that randomly match up. That's 632,673,409 correlation calculations! This is called “data dredging.” Instead of starting with a hypothesis and testing it, I instead abused the data to see what correlations shake out. It’s a dangerous way to go about analysis, because any sufficiently large dataset will yield strong correlations completely at random.
  2. Lack of causal connection: There is probably Because these pages are automatically generated, it's possible that the two variables you are viewing are in fact causually related. I take steps to prevent the obvious ones from showing on the site (I don't let data about the weather in one city correlate with the weather in a neighboring city, for example), but sometimes they still pop up. If they are related, cool! You found a loophole.
    no direct connection between these variables, despite what the AI says above. This is exacerbated by the fact that I used "Years" as the base variable. Lots of things happen in a year that are not related to each other! Most studies would use something like "one person" in stead of "one year" to be the "thing" studied.
  3. Observations not independent: For many variables, sequential years are not independent of each other. If a population of people is continuously doing something every day, there is no reason to think they would suddenly change how they are doing that thing on January 1. A simple Personally I don't find any p-value calculation to be 'simple,' but you know what I mean.
    p-value calculation does not take this into account, so mathematically it appears less probable than it really is.
  4. Y-axis doesn't start at zero: I truncated the Y-axes of the graph above. I also used a line graph, which makes the visual connection stand out more than it deserves. Nothing against line graphs. They are great at telling a story when you have linear data! But visually it is deceptive because the only data is at the points on the graph, not the lines on the graph. In between each point, the data could have been doing anything. Like going for a random walk by itself!
    Mathematically what I showed is true, but it is intentionally misleading. Below is the same chart but with both Y-axes starting at zero.




Try it yourself

You can calculate the values on this page on your own! Try running the Python code to see the calculation results. Step 1: Download and install Python on your computer.

Step 2: Open a plaintext editor like Notepad and paste the code below into it.

Step 3: Save the file as "calculate_correlation.py" in a place you will remember, like your desktop. Copy the file location to your clipboard. On Windows, you can right-click the file and click "Properties," and then copy what comes after "Location:" As an example, on my computer the location is "C:\Users\tyler\Desktop"

Step 4: Open a command line window. For example, by pressing start and typing "cmd" and them pressing enter.

Step 5: Install the required modules by typing "pip install numpy", then pressing enter, then typing "pip install scipy", then pressing enter.

Step 6: Navigate to the location where you saved the Python file by using the "cd" command. For example, I would type "cd C:\Users\tyler\Desktop" and push enter.

Step 7: Run the Python script by typing "python calculate_correlation.py"

If you run into any issues, I suggest asking ChatGPT to walk you through installing Python and running the code below on your system. Try this question:

"Walk me through installing Python on my computer to run a script that uses scipy and numpy. Go step-by-step and ask me to confirm before moving on. Start by asking me questions about my operating system so that you know how to proceed. Assume I want the simplest installation with the latest version of Python and that I do not currently have any of the necessary elements installed. Remember to only give me one step per response and confirm I have done it before proceeding."


# These modules make it easier to perform the calculation
import numpy as np
from scipy import stats

# We'll define a function that we can call to return the correlation calculations
def calculate_correlation(array1, array2):

    # Calculate Pearson correlation coefficient and p-value
    correlation, p_value = stats.pearsonr(array1, array2)

    # Calculate R-squared as the square of the correlation coefficient
    r_squared = correlation**2

    return correlation, r_squared, p_value

# These are the arrays for the variables shown on this page, but you can modify them to be any two sets of numbers
array_1 = np.array([50,170,430,440,430,310,350,320,250,180,220,190,210,250,220,170,160,180,250,])
array_2 = np.array([11.2625,12.7741,21.0978,20.3547,23.5176,18.1364,20.3638,15.3385,15.7372,13.8405,14.2229,15.7747,14,14,16.9074,16.7803,15.8268,13.8247,15.2836,])
array_1_name = "The number of ophthalmic laboratory technicians in Mississippi"
array_2_name = "Liquefied petroleum gas used in Romania"

# Perform the calculation
print(f"Calculating the correlation between {array_1_name} and {array_2_name}...")
correlation, r_squared, p_value = calculate_correlation(array_1, array_2)

# Print the results
print("Correlation Coefficient:", correlation)
print("R-squared:", r_squared)
print("P-value:", p_value)



Reuseable content

You may re-use the images on this page for any purpose, even commercial purposes, without asking for permission. The only requirement is that you attribute Tyler Vigen. Attribution can take many different forms. If you leave the "tylervigen.com" link in the image, that satisfies it just fine. If you remove it and move it to a footnote, that's fine too. You can also just write "Charts courtesy of Tyler Vigen" at the bottom of an article.

You do not need to attribute "the spurious correlations website," and you don't even need to link here if you don't want to. I don't gain anything from pageviews. There are no ads on this site, there is nothing for sale, and I am not for hire.

For the record, I am just one person. Tyler Vigen, he/him/his. I do have degrees, but they should not go after my name unless you want to annoy my wife. If that is your goal, then go ahead and cite me as "Tyler Vigen, A.A. A.A.S. B.A. J.D." Otherwise it is just "Tyler Vigen."

When spoken, my last name is pronounced "vegan," like I don't eat meat.

Full license details.
For more on re-use permissions, or to get a signed release form, see tylervigen.com/permission.

Download images for these variables:


View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Thanks for shining a light on this correlation!


Correlation ID: 1903 · Black Variable ID: 10355 · Red Variable ID: 24840
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0