about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #1,429 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Air pollution in Somerset, Pennsylvania and the second variable is Violent crime rates.  The chart goes from 1990 to 2022, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

Cleaner air led to clearer heads. As the smog lifted, so did the tension. It seems like when the air was cleaner, the residents were just too 'ozone' to commit violent crimes.

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: An image that looks like it is a scene from 'Star Wars,' depicting a dystopian cityscape in Somerset, Pennsylvania. Amidst the thick haze, tall metallic structures rise, casting eerie shadows in the obscured city streets. Flashing police sirens and distant silhouettes of law enforcement depict the urgency of the situation, hinting at a troubled community struggling under the heavy environmental and social burdens. 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: Less than ideal air quality in Somerset, Pennsylvania and Violent crime rates. 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 2D animation Parallax art Data cyber art Cyber folk An image that looks like it is a scene from 'Star Wars'
ChatGPT: An image that looks like it is a scene from 'Star Wars'

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 Less than ideal air quality in Somerset, Pennsylvania and Violent crime rates together. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In Somerset, Pennsylvania, a thick haze looms over the town, obscuring the sky and reducing visibility. In the background, police sirens wail as they race to the scene of a violent crime, highlighting the impact of less than ideal air quality and high violent crime rates on the community.

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: [ An image that looks like it is a scene from 'Star Wars' ] and depicting this scene: In Somerset, Pennsylvania, a thick haze looms over the town, obscuring the sky and reducing visibility. In the background, police sirens wail as they race to the scene of a violent crime, highlighting the impact of less than ideal air quality and high violent crime rates on the community. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: An image that looks like it is a scene from 'Star Wars,' depicting a dystopian cityscape in Somerset, Pennsylvania. Amidst the thick haze, tall metallic structures rise, casting eerie shadows in the obscured city streets. Flashing police sirens and distant silhouettes of law enforcement depict the urgency of the situation, hinting at a troubled community struggling under the heavy environmental and social burdens.

*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 a decrease in Air pollution in Somerset, Pennsylvania caused Violent crime rates to decrease. Include one good pun.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
The Thin Air Between Them: Exploring the Relationship Between Air Pollution in Somerset, Pennsylvania and Violent Crime Rates

The Journal of Atmospheric Criminology

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 Air pollution in Somerset, Pennsylvania and Violent crime rates. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Make the title seem clever.

Your research team used data from Environmental Protection Agency and FBI Criminal Justice Information Services to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.7837313 and p < 0.01 for 1990 to 2022.

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]]
The Thin Air Between Them: Exploring the Relationship Between Air Pollution in Somerset, Pennsylvania and Violent Crime Rates

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve into the curious coexistence of air pollution and violent crime rates in Somerset, Pennsylvania. Sifting through copious amounts of data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services, we uncovered a relationship that is nothing to sneeze at. Our analysis revealed a robust correlation coefficient of 0.7837313 with a p-value less than 0.01, spanning the years from 1990 to 2022. Our findings suggest that the quality of the air may have a not-so-innocuous influence on the community's propensity for violence. This research opens new avenues for understanding the interplay between environmental factors and human behavior, breathing fresh air into the field of criminology and air quality research.


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 Air pollution in Somerset, Pennsylvania and Violent crime rates. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
The Thin Air Between Them: Exploring the Relationship Between Air Pollution in Somerset, Pennsylvania and Violent Crime Rates

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve into the curious coexistence of air pollution and violent crime rates in Somerset, Pennsylvania. Sifting through copious amounts of data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services, we uncovered a relationship that is nothing to sneeze at. Our analysis revealed a robust correlation coefficient of 0.7837313 with a p-value less than 0.01, spanning the years from 1990 to 2022. Our findings suggest that the quality of the air may have a not-so-innocuous influence on the community's propensity for violence. This research opens new avenues for understanding the interplay between environmental factors and human behavior, breathing fresh air into the field of criminology and air quality research.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
INTRODUCTION

The interconnectedness of environmental factors and human behavior has long been a subject of interest and speculation, with countless studies attempting to tease apart the complex web of influences that shape our actions and interactions. Our investigation delves into the intriguing relationship between air pollution and violent crime rates in Somerset, Pennsylvania. While it may seem like a disparate duo at first glance, the correlation we uncovered is nothing short of breathtaking.

Somerset, known for its scenic beauty and charming small-town appeal, has also grappled with air pollution issues, stemming from a variety of sources such as industrial emissions, vehicle exhaust, and agricultural activities. The intricate dance between these airborne contaminants and the community's proclivity for violent behavior caught our attention, prompting a thorough analysis of the available data.

As we wade into these murky waters (or perhaps, polluted air), it is essential to acknowledge the potential confounding variables and lurking outliers that could muddy the relationship between air quality and crime. Methodological rigor and statistical scrutiny have been our trusty companions on this investigative journey, helping us sift through the haze of information to uncover patterns and associations that might otherwise go unnoticed.

The findings of our study not only provide a glimpse into the curious kinship between air pollution and violent crime rates but also beckon us to consider the broader implications for public health and safety. The air we breathe may hold more sway over our behaviors than previously surmised, adding an intriguing layer of complexity to the already intricate tapestry of criminological inquiry.

As we venture further into the heart of our analysis, it becomes evident that we are not merely examining statistics and figures, but also breathing life into a field that may benefit from a breath of fresh air – both figuratively and literally. Our investigation aims to shed light on this uncharted territory, inviting scholars and practitioners to peer through the haze and contemplate the implications of the thin air between air pollution and violent crime rates.


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 Air pollution in Somerset, Pennsylvania and Violent crime rates. 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 CVS receipts.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
The Thin Air Between Them: Exploring the Relationship Between Air Pollution in Somerset, Pennsylvania and Violent Crime Rates

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve into the curious coexistence of air pollution and violent crime rates in Somerset, Pennsylvania. Sifting through copious amounts of data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services, we uncovered a relationship that is nothing to sneeze at. Our analysis revealed a robust correlation coefficient of 0.7837313 with a p-value less than 0.01, spanning the years from 1990 to 2022. Our findings suggest that the quality of the air may have a not-so-innocuous influence on the community's propensity for violence. This research opens new avenues for understanding the interplay between environmental factors and human behavior, breathing fresh air into the field of criminology and air quality research.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
INTRODUCTION
The interconnectedness of environmental factors and human behavior has long been a subject of interest and speculation, with countless studies attempting to tease apart the complex web of influences that shape our actions and interactions. Our investigation delves into the intriguing relationship between air pollution and violent crime rates in Somerset, Pennsylvania. While it may seem like a disparate duo at first glance, the correlation we uncovered is nothing short of breathtaking.
Somerset, known for its scenic beauty and charming small-town appeal, has also grappled with air pollution issues, stemming from a variety of sources such as industrial emissions, vehicle exhaust, and agricultural activities. The intricate dance between these airborne contaminants and the community's proclivity for violent behavior caught our attention, prompting a thorough analysis of the available data.
As we wade into these murky waters (or perhaps, polluted air), it is essential to acknowledge the potential confounding variables and lurking outliers that could muddy the relationship between air quality and crime. Methodological rigor and statistical scrutiny have been our trusty companions on this investigative journey, helping us sift through the haze of information to uncover patterns and associations that might otherwise go unnoticed.
The findings of our study not only provide a glimpse into the curious kinship between air pollution and violent crime rates but also beckon us to consider the broader implications for public health and safety. The air we breathe may hold more sway over our behaviors than previously surmised, adding an intriguing layer of complexity to the already intricate tapestry of criminological inquiry.
As we venture further into the heart of our analysis, it becomes evident that we are not merely examining statistics and figures, but also breathing life into a field that may benefit from a breath of fresh air – both figuratively and literally. Our investigation aims to shed light on this uncharted territory, inviting scholars and practitioners to peer through the haze and contemplate the implications of the thin air between air pollution and violent crime rates.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The connection between air pollution and violent crime rates has captivated the attention of researchers and scholars for decades. Smith et al. (2010) first broached this topic in their seminal work, "Pollution and Public Peril," shedding light on the potential implications of environmental hazards on criminal behavior. Their findings hinted at a potential correlation, but cautions about inferring causation.

Doe and Jones (2015) continued to explore this relationship in their comprehensive study, "Toxic Air and Tumultuous Times," documenting the intricate interplay between air quality and violent crime in urban settings. Their research revealed compelling evidence of a positive association, but stopped short of blowing the lid off a definitive causal link.

Turning to non-fiction literature, "The Death and Life of Great American Cities" by Jane Jacobs and "Silent Spring" by Rachel Carson provide a broader context for understanding the environmental and social dynamics at play in urban environments. These works offer invaluable insights into the complex tapestry of human-nature interactions and the potential repercussions of environmental degradation on community well-being.

On a more fictional note, the works of Edgar Allan Poe, renowned for their dark and sinister undercurrents, evoke an atmosphere that, while unrelated to air pollution and crime rates, underscores the somber tone of our investigation. Similarly, Agatha Christie's "The Murder of Roger Ackroyd" offers a captivating narrative but little in the way of empirical evidence on the subject. Nevertheless, these literary references serve as a reminder of the multifaceted nature of human behavior and the need for a keen investigative eye.

Venturing further into the realm of unconventional sources, the authors found themselves engrossed in the profundities of seemingly mundane artifacts. A perusal of local CVS receipts revealed a wealth of information that, while perhaps not academically rigorous, provided an unexpected window into the daily transactions and peculiar purchases of Somerset residents. While this unconventional methodology raised some eyebrows, it also underscored the need for creativity and resourcefulness in navigating the labyrinthine corridors of research.

As we sifted through this eclectic array of sources, it became increasingly evident that our quest for understanding the relationship between air pollution and violent crime rates was not merely an academic pursuit, but a rollicking adventure through the annals of human curiosity and the whimsical wonders of scholarly inquiry.

Stay tuned for the next section where we'll delve into the methodology used to unravel this mysterious connection!


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 Air pollution in Somerset, Pennsylvania and Violent crime rates. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Environmental Protection Agency and FBI Criminal Justice Information Services . You used data from 1990 to 2022

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]]
The Thin Air Between Them: Exploring the Relationship Between Air Pollution in Somerset, Pennsylvania and Violent Crime Rates

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve into the curious coexistence of air pollution and violent crime rates in Somerset, Pennsylvania. Sifting through copious amounts of data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services, we uncovered a relationship that is nothing to sneeze at. Our analysis revealed a robust correlation coefficient of 0.7837313 with a p-value less than 0.01, spanning the years from 1990 to 2022. Our findings suggest that the quality of the air may have a not-so-innocuous influence on the community's propensity for violence. This research opens new avenues for understanding the interplay between environmental factors and human behavior, breathing fresh air into the field of criminology and air quality research.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
INTRODUCTION
The interconnectedness of environmental factors and human behavior has long been a subject of interest and speculation, with countless studies attempting to tease apart the complex web of influences that shape our actions and interactions. Our investigation delves into the intriguing relationship between air pollution and violent crime rates in Somerset, Pennsylvania. While it may seem like a disparate duo at first glance, the correlation we uncovered is nothing short of breathtaking.
Somerset, known for its scenic beauty and charming small-town appeal, has also grappled with air pollution issues, stemming from a variety of sources such as industrial emissions, vehicle exhaust, and agricultural activities. The intricate dance between these airborne contaminants and the community's proclivity for violent behavior caught our attention, prompting a thorough analysis of the available data.
As we wade into these murky waters (or perhaps, polluted air), it is essential to acknowledge the potential confounding variables and lurking outliers that could muddy the relationship between air quality and crime. Methodological rigor and statistical scrutiny have been our trusty companions on this investigative journey, helping us sift through the haze of information to uncover patterns and associations that might otherwise go unnoticed.
The findings of our study not only provide a glimpse into the curious kinship between air pollution and violent crime rates but also beckon us to consider the broader implications for public health and safety. The air we breathe may hold more sway over our behaviors than previously surmised, adding an intriguing layer of complexity to the already intricate tapestry of criminological inquiry.
As we venture further into the heart of our analysis, it becomes evident that we are not merely examining statistics and figures, but also breathing life into a field that may benefit from a breath of fresh air – both figuratively and literally. Our investigation aims to shed light on this uncharted territory, inviting scholars and practitioners to peer through the haze and contemplate the implications of the thin air between air pollution and violent crime rates.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

METHODOLOGY

Data Collection:

Our research team embarked on a virtual journey across the vast expanse of the internet, traversing the digital highways and byways in search of datasets that could illuminate the curious relationship between air pollution and violent crime rates in Somerset, Pennsylvania. The Environmental Protection Agency served as our primary oasis for air quality information, providing a treasure trove of data spanning the years from 1990 to 2022. We plunged into a deluge of measurements, indices, and pollutant profiles, braving the storm of technical jargon and statistical minutiae to extract the nuggets of insight hidden within.

Simultaneously, we charted a course to the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services, where crime statistics awaited our perusal. Armed with spreadsheets, statistical software, and a keen eye for anomalies, we meticulously combed through the convolution of criminal incidents, arrests, and offenses in Somerset, teasing out the threads that could lead us to the elusive connection between airborne particulates and unlawful activities.

Data Analysis:

With data in hand, our journey veered into the realm of statistics and analytics, where regression models and correlation coefficients became our guiding constellations. Our initial foray involved a detailed examination of temporal patterns, discerning the undulating rhythms and cyclical fluctuations that echoed through the years. We employed advanced statistical techniques to untangle the intricate web of relationships, weaving together air pollution levels and violent crime rates into a narrative that spoke volumes about the hidden dynamics at play.

The Statistical Odyssey:

In our quest to unravel the enigma of air pollution's influence on criminal proclivities, we embarked on a statistical odyssey that tested the limits of our computational prowess. From multiple linear regressions to multivariate analyses, we ventured into the labyrinthine realm of statistical models, navigating the twists and turns of parameter estimates and goodness-of-fit metrics with unwavering determination. The path to uncovering meaningful associations between environmental exposure and antisocial behavior was riddled with complexities and challenges, but we persisted with a dogged resolve to unearth the truth lurking beneath the surface.

Mindful of Confounding Variables:

As seasoned explorers in the domain of empirical inquiry, we remained vigilant in our vigilance for potential confounding variables that could obfuscate the true nature of the relationship under scrutiny. Demographic factors, socioeconomic disparities, and geographical peculiarities cast looming shadows on our path, necessitating meticulous adjustments and stratifications to ensure that our findings reflected the genuine interplay between air pollution and criminal activity, rather than being obscured by extraneous influences.

The Road Less Traveled:

In every statistical endeavor lies a trove of unseen pitfalls and treacherous detours that could lead astray the intrepid investigator. To navigate this labyrinthine landscape with precision, we sought refuge in robustness checks and sensitivity analyses, scrutinizing our findings through multiple lenses to validate the robustness of our conclusions. Our statistical compass remained unwavering, guiding us through the statistical thickets with a blend of methodological rigor and scholarly tenacity.

In a vein as opaque as air pollution itself, we oscillated between the domains of hypothesis testing and exploratory analysis, acutely aware of the fine balance between scientific sobriety and investigative curiosity. Our methodological journey drew us closer to the heart of the matter, transcending the confines of conventional analyses to chart new territory and unearth unsuspected nuances in the interplay between air quality and criminal behavior.

This methodological expedition, like any adventurous undertaking, required a blend of meticulous planning, technical fortitude, and a dash of scholarly audacity. As we emerge from these statistical depths, we stand poised to present our findings – a testament to the intrepid spirit that journeyed through the thin air between them, unearthing a correlation that, much like the air we breathe, is nothing to sneeze at.

Next stop: Results and Discussion, where the unspoken intricacies of our findings shall be unveiled!


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 Air pollution in Somerset, Pennsylvania and Violent crime rates. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Environmental Protection Agency and FBI Criminal Justice Information Services .

For the time period 1990 to 2022, you found a correlation 0.7837313, r-squared of 0.6142347, 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]]
The Thin Air Between Them: Exploring the Relationship Between Air Pollution in Somerset, Pennsylvania and Violent Crime Rates

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve into the curious coexistence of air pollution and violent crime rates in Somerset, Pennsylvania. Sifting through copious amounts of data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services, we uncovered a relationship that is nothing to sneeze at. Our analysis revealed a robust correlation coefficient of 0.7837313 with a p-value less than 0.01, spanning the years from 1990 to 2022. Our findings suggest that the quality of the air may have a not-so-innocuous influence on the community's propensity for violence. This research opens new avenues for understanding the interplay between environmental factors and human behavior, breathing fresh air into the field of criminology and air quality research.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
INTRODUCTION
The interconnectedness of environmental factors and human behavior has long been a subject of interest and speculation, with countless studies attempting to tease apart the complex web of influences that shape our actions and interactions. Our investigation delves into the intriguing relationship between air pollution and violent crime rates in Somerset, Pennsylvania. While it may seem like a disparate duo at first glance, the correlation we uncovered is nothing short of breathtaking.
Somerset, known for its scenic beauty and charming small-town appeal, has also grappled with air pollution issues, stemming from a variety of sources such as industrial emissions, vehicle exhaust, and agricultural activities. The intricate dance between these airborne contaminants and the community's proclivity for violent behavior caught our attention, prompting a thorough analysis of the available data.
As we wade into these murky waters (or perhaps, polluted air), it is essential to acknowledge the potential confounding variables and lurking outliers that could muddy the relationship between air quality and crime. Methodological rigor and statistical scrutiny have been our trusty companions on this investigative journey, helping us sift through the haze of information to uncover patterns and associations that might otherwise go unnoticed.
The findings of our study not only provide a glimpse into the curious kinship between air pollution and violent crime rates but also beckon us to consider the broader implications for public health and safety. The air we breathe may hold more sway over our behaviors than previously surmised, adding an intriguing layer of complexity to the already intricate tapestry of criminological inquiry.
As we venture further into the heart of our analysis, it becomes evident that we are not merely examining statistics and figures, but also breathing life into a field that may benefit from a breath of fresh air – both figuratively and literally. Our investigation aims to shed light on this uncharted territory, inviting scholars and practitioners to peer through the haze and contemplate the implications of the thin air between air pollution and violent crime rates.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The bated breath with which we awaited the results of our analysis was not in vain. Our investigation into the relationship between air pollution and violent crime rates in Somerset, Pennsylvania has yielded enlightening findings.

Upon conducting our statistical analysis, we found a substantial correlation coefficient of 0.7837313 between air pollution and violent crime rates. The resulting r-squared value of 0.6142347 indicates that a meaningful portion of the variance in violent crime rates can be explained by fluctuations in air pollution levels. The p-value of less than 0.01 underscores the robustness of this relationship, leaving little room for doubt that our findings are more than just a puff of smoke.

In Figure 1, prominently displayed like a prized painting in a gallery, the scatterplot coherently depicts the strong positive correlation between air pollution and violent crime rates over the years from 1990 to 2022. It is a visual testament to the palpable connection we unveiled, a connection that is as clear as the cloudy plumes of pollution that hang in the Somerset air.

These results not only add a compelling dimension to the discourse on environmental influences on human behavior but also lend credence to the notion that the air we breathe may have a weighty impact on the incidence of violent crime. It seems that the old saying "there's something in the air" takes on a whole new meaning in Somerset, Pennsylvania.

In the next section, we will delve into the implications of these findings and ponder the potential mechanisms underlying this unexpected relationship. Just as the winds of change can sweep through the open air, our research aims to stir the winds of inquiry and breathe new life into the exploration of air pollution and its effect on community behaviors.


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 Air pollution in Somerset, Pennsylvania and Violent crime rates. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

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]]
The Thin Air Between Them: Exploring the Relationship Between Air Pollution in Somerset, Pennsylvania and Violent Crime Rates

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve into the curious coexistence of air pollution and violent crime rates in Somerset, Pennsylvania. Sifting through copious amounts of data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services, we uncovered a relationship that is nothing to sneeze at. Our analysis revealed a robust correlation coefficient of 0.7837313 with a p-value less than 0.01, spanning the years from 1990 to 2022. Our findings suggest that the quality of the air may have a not-so-innocuous influence on the community's propensity for violence. This research opens new avenues for understanding the interplay between environmental factors and human behavior, breathing fresh air into the field of criminology and air quality research.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The connection between air pollution and violent crime rates has captivated the attention of researchers and scholars for decades. Smith et al. (2010) first broached this topic in their seminal work, "Pollution and Public Peril," shedding light on the potential implications of environmental hazards on criminal behavior. Their findings hinted at a potential correlation, but cautions about inferring causation.
Doe and Jones (2015) continued to explore this relationship in their comprehensive study, "Toxic Air and Tumultuous Times," documenting the intricate interplay between air quality and violent crime in urban settings. Their research revealed compelling evidence of a positive association, but stopped short of blowing the lid off a definitive causal link.
Turning to non-fiction literature, "The Death and Life of Great American Cities" by Jane Jacobs and "Silent Spring" by Rachel Carson provide a broader context for understanding the environmental and social dynamics at play in urban environments. These works offer invaluable insights into the complex tapestry of human-nature interactions and the potential repercussions of environmental degradation on community well-being.
On a more fictional note, the works of Edgar Allan Poe, renowned for their dark and sinister undercurrents, evoke an atmosphere that, while unrelated to air pollution and crime rates, underscores the somber tone of our investigation. Similarly, Agatha Christie's "The Murder of Roger Ackroyd" offers a captivating narrative but little in the way of empirical evidence on the subject. Nevertheless, these literary references serve as a reminder of the multifaceted nature of human behavior and the need for a keen investigative eye.
Venturing further into the realm of unconventional sources, the authors found themselves engrossed in the profundities of seemingly mundane artifacts. A perusal of local CVS receipts revealed a wealth of information that, while perhaps not academically rigorous, provided an unexpected window into the daily transactions and peculiar purchases of Somerset residents. While this unconventional methodology raised some eyebrows, it also underscored the need for creativity and resourcefulness in navigating the labyrinthine corridors of research.
As we sifted through this eclectic array of sources, it became increasingly evident that our quest for understanding the relationship between air pollution and violent crime rates was not merely an academic pursuit, but a rollicking adventure through the annals of human curiosity and the whimsical wonders of scholarly inquiry.
Stay tuned for the next section where we'll delve into the methodology used to unravel this mysterious connection!

[[RESULTS]]
The bated breath with which we awaited the results of our analysis was not in vain. Our investigation into the relationship between air pollution and violent crime rates in Somerset, Pennsylvania has yielded enlightening findings.
Upon conducting our statistical analysis, we found a substantial correlation coefficient of 0.7837313 between air pollution and violent crime rates. The resulting r-squared value of 0.6142347 indicates that a meaningful portion of the variance in violent crime rates can be explained by fluctuations in air pollution levels. The p-value of less than 0.01 underscores the robustness of this relationship, leaving little room for doubt that our findings are more than just a puff of smoke.
In Figure 1, prominently displayed like a prized painting in a gallery, the scatterplot coherently depicts the strong positive correlation between air pollution and violent crime rates over the years from 1990 to 2022. It is a visual testament to the palpable connection we unveiled, a connection that is as clear as the cloudy plumes of pollution that hang in the Somerset air.
These results not only add a compelling dimension to the discourse on environmental influences on human behavior but also lend credence to the notion that the air we breathe may have a weighty impact on the incidence of violent crime. It seems that the old saying "there's something in the air" takes on a whole new meaning in Somerset, Pennsylvania.
In the next section, we will delve into the implications of these findings and ponder the potential mechanisms underlying this unexpected relationship. Just as the winds of change can sweep through the open air, our research aims to stir the winds of inquiry and breathe new life into the exploration of air pollution and its effect on community behaviors.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Our findings align with prior research, offering substantial support for the notion that air pollution and violent crime rates are intertwined like the tendrils of ivy on a trellis. The robust correlation coefficient we observed echoes the tentative connections hinted at by Smith et al. (2010) and Doe and Jones (2015), akin to a symphony in which each note harmoniously complements the others. While caution against inferring causation still looms like a storm cloud on the horizon, our results undeniably provide a breath of fresh air to the body of evidence.

Returning to our delightful foray into the literature, the whimsical references to Edgar Allan Poe and Agatha Christie now appear eerily prescient in light of our empirical findings. Just as the intermingling of life and death pervades Poe's tales and the enigmatic puzzles captivate Christie's characters, the interplay between air pollution and violent crime proved to be an enigmatic puzzle of its own, one whose pieces have begun to fall into place.

Our unconventional dalliance with local CVS receipts, which garnered more than a few quizzical looks, now warrants a nod of vindication. While not the backbone of our study, it highlights the importance of resourcefulness and the unexpected avenues through which insight can be gleaned. Indeed, a perusal of inconspicuous sources can yield unexpected treasures, much like a sudden gust of wind carrying secrets to our waiting ears.

The measured rise of the correlation coefficient and the tantalizing dance of the p-value leave little room for doubt: the air in Somerset, Pennsylvania has a not-so-innocuous influence on the community's proclivity for violence. Our results, though serious in their implications, provide a refreshing jolt of revelation, akin to the bracing shock of a gust of wind on a summer day.

In the next section, we will unearth the potential mechanisms underpinning this intriguing relationship, plumbing the depths of atmospheric influences and human behavior as if we were miners in a cavern rich with scholarly ore. Like intrepid explorers in a jungle of interwoven factors, we seek to illuminate the lurking shadows and reveal the tangled roots of this curious phenomenon. Join us as we dive into the murky depths and strive to uncover the hidden treasures of this complex connection.


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 Air pollution in Somerset, Pennsylvania and Violent crime rates. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

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]]
The Thin Air Between Them: Exploring the Relationship Between Air Pollution in Somerset, Pennsylvania and Violent Crime Rates

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve into the curious coexistence of air pollution and violent crime rates in Somerset, Pennsylvania. Sifting through copious amounts of data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services, we uncovered a relationship that is nothing to sneeze at. Our analysis revealed a robust correlation coefficient of 0.7837313 with a p-value less than 0.01, spanning the years from 1990 to 2022. Our findings suggest that the quality of the air may have a not-so-innocuous influence on the community's propensity for violence. This research opens new avenues for understanding the interplay between environmental factors and human behavior, breathing fresh air into the field of criminology and air quality research.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
INTRODUCTION
The interconnectedness of environmental factors and human behavior has long been a subject of interest and speculation, with countless studies attempting to tease apart the complex web of influences that shape our actions and interactions. Our investigation delves into the intriguing relationship between air pollution and violent crime rates in Somerset, Pennsylvania. While it may seem like a disparate duo at first glance, the correlation we uncovered is nothing short of breathtaking.
Somerset, known for its scenic beauty and charming small-town appeal, has also grappled with air pollution issues, stemming from a variety of sources such as industrial emissions, vehicle exhaust, and agricultural activities. The intricate dance between these airborne contaminants and the community's proclivity for violent behavior caught our attention, prompting a thorough analysis of the available data.
As we wade into these murky waters (or perhaps, polluted air), it is essential to acknowledge the potential confounding variables and lurking outliers that could muddy the relationship between air quality and crime. Methodological rigor and statistical scrutiny have been our trusty companions on this investigative journey, helping us sift through the haze of information to uncover patterns and associations that might otherwise go unnoticed.
The findings of our study not only provide a glimpse into the curious kinship between air pollution and violent crime rates but also beckon us to consider the broader implications for public health and safety. The air we breathe may hold more sway over our behaviors than previously surmised, adding an intriguing layer of complexity to the already intricate tapestry of criminological inquiry.
As we venture further into the heart of our analysis, it becomes evident that we are not merely examining statistics and figures, but also breathing life into a field that may benefit from a breath of fresh air – both figuratively and literally. Our investigation aims to shed light on this uncharted territory, inviting scholars and practitioners to peer through the haze and contemplate the implications of the thin air between air pollution and violent crime rates.

[[RESULTS]]
The bated breath with which we awaited the results of our analysis was not in vain. Our investigation into the relationship between air pollution and violent crime rates in Somerset, Pennsylvania has yielded enlightening findings.
Upon conducting our statistical analysis, we found a substantial correlation coefficient of 0.7837313 between air pollution and violent crime rates. The resulting r-squared value of 0.6142347 indicates that a meaningful portion of the variance in violent crime rates can be explained by fluctuations in air pollution levels. The p-value of less than 0.01 underscores the robustness of this relationship, leaving little room for doubt that our findings are more than just a puff of smoke.
In Figure 1, prominently displayed like a prized painting in a gallery, the scatterplot coherently depicts the strong positive correlation between air pollution and violent crime rates over the years from 1990 to 2022. It is a visual testament to the palpable connection we unveiled, a connection that is as clear as the cloudy plumes of pollution that hang in the Somerset air.
These results not only add a compelling dimension to the discourse on environmental influences on human behavior but also lend credence to the notion that the air we breathe may have a weighty impact on the incidence of violent crime. It seems that the old saying "there's something in the air" takes on a whole new meaning in Somerset, Pennsylvania.
In the next section, we will delve into the implications of these findings and ponder the potential mechanisms underlying this unexpected relationship. Just as the winds of change can sweep through the open air, our research aims to stir the winds of inquiry and breathe new life into the exploration of air pollution and its effect on community behaviors.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, our investigation into the connection between air pollution and violent crime rates in Somerset, Pennsylvania has not left us gasping for air, but rather, has provided a breath of fresh insight into the interplay between environmental factors and human behavior. The robust correlation coefficient of 0.7837313, coupled with a p-value less than 0.01, serves as a compelling testament to the significant relationship uncovered, leaving little room for "smoggy" skepticism. As we navigate through the haze of data, it becomes evident that the air we breathe may carry unforeseen implications for community behaviors, adding a gust of complexity to our understanding of criminological dynamics.

While our findings may seem like a departure from traditional research avenues, they serve as a poignant reminder that the atmosphere we inhabit holds more than just oxygen and nitrogen – it also harbors potential influences on our actions and interactions. The insidious nature of air pollution and its impact on societal behavior beckon us to consider the broader implications for public health and safety, prompting us to take a "breathtaking" pause and contemplate the unseen threads that bind environmental quality and human conduct.

As we unravel the tangled web of correlations and causations, our research not only illuminates the need for continued exploration of the thin air between air pollution and violent crime rates but also offers a glimmer of hope for shedding light on this complex relationship. It is our conviction that the findings presented in this study add a dash of clarity to the mist of uncertainty, paving the way for future inquiries that dare to air out the unexplored territories of criminological and environmental research.

In light of the significant findings and the whimsical turns our research has taken, we assert that no more research is needed in this area. After all, we wouldn't want to belabor the point or risk being accused of generating hot air. With this, we bid adieu to this curious journey, hopeful that our work has offered a breath of fresh air to the field of interdisciplinary inquiry.


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 The Thin Air Between Them: Exploring the Relationship Between Air Pollution in Somerset, Pennsylvania and Violent Crime Rates. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Atmospheric Criminology


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 The Thin Air Between Them: Exploring the Relationship Between Air Pollution in Somerset, Pennsylvania and Violent Crime Rates. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Institute for Atmospheric and Societal Harmony


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 The Thin Air Between Them: Exploring the Relationship Between Air Pollution in Somerset, Pennsylvania and Violent Crime Rates with an abstract of In this study, we delve into the curious coexistence of air pollution and violent crime rates in Somerset, Pennsylvania. Sifting through copious amounts of data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services, we uncovered a relationship that is nothing to sneeze at. Our analysis revealed a robust correlation coefficient of 0.7837313 with a p-value less than 0.01, spanning the years from 1990 to 2022. Our findings suggest that the quality of the air may have a not-so-innocuous influence on the community's propensity for violence. This research opens new avenues for understanding the interplay between environmental factors and human behavior, breathing fresh air into the field of criminology and air quality research.

ChatGPT:

"air pollution Somerset Pennsylvania violent crime rates," "relationship air quality crime rates," "environmental factors crime rates," "air pollution impact community violence," "correlation air pollution crime rates," "EPA data crime rates correlation," "FBI crime data air pollution correlation," "criminology air quality research."

*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

Air pollution in Somerset, Pennsylvania
Detailed data title: Percentage of days with moderate or worse air quality in Somerset, PA
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
See what else correlates with Air pollution in Somerset, Pennsylvania

Violent crime rates
Detailed data title: The violent crime rate per 100,000 residents in United States
Source: FBI Criminal Justice Information Services
See what else correlates with Violent crime rates

Correlation r = 0.7837313 (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 = 0.6142347 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 61.4% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Violent crime rates) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Air pollution in Somerset, Pennsylvania) over the 33 years from 1990 through 2022.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 6.9E-8. 0.0000000689719433997805300000
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 0.78 in 6.9E-6% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 14,498,649 random variables You don't actually need 14 million 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 32 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 32 because we have two variables measured over a period of 33 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.

[ 0.6, 0.89 ] 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.
199019911992199319941995199619971998199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022
Air pollution in Somerset, Pennsylvania (Bad air quality days)0.2160660.3333330.1515150.2486190.2305560.3582090.2535210.2027780.2387640.1713480.06646530.1713480.217270.1104480.06685240.1988950.2011490.2052790.1222220.09169050.1758240.09356730.1415090.07547170.04419890.05226480.0924370.05785120.07563030.05292480.02191780.06611570.025
Violent crime rates (Violent crime)729.6758.2757.7747.1713.6684.5636.6611567.6523506.5504.5494.4475.8463.2469479.3471.8458.6431.9404.5387.1387.8369.1361.6373.7397.5394.9383.4380.8398.5387380.7




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.
  5. Outlandish outliers: There are "outliers" in this data. In concept, "outlier" just means "way different than the rest of your dataset." When calculating a correlation like this, they are particularly impactful because a single outlier can substantially increase your correlation.

    For the purposes of this project, I counted a point as an outlier if it the residual was two standard deviations from the mean.

    (This bullet point only shows up in the details page on charts that do, in fact, have outliers.)
    They stand out on the scatterplot above: notice the dots that are far away from any other dots. I intentionally mishandeled outliers, which makes the correlation look extra strong.




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([0.216066,0.333333,0.151515,0.248619,0.230556,0.358209,0.253521,0.202778,0.238764,0.171348,0.0664653,0.171348,0.21727,0.110448,0.0668524,0.198895,0.201149,0.205279,0.122222,0.0916905,0.175824,0.0935673,0.141509,0.0754717,0.0441989,0.0522648,0.092437,0.0578512,0.0756303,0.0529248,0.0219178,0.0661157,0.025,])
array_2 = np.array([729.6,758.2,757.7,747.1,713.6,684.5,636.6,611,567.6,523,506.5,504.5,494.4,475.8,463.2,469,479.3,471.8,458.6,431.9,404.5,387.1,387.8,369.1,361.6,373.7,397.5,394.9,383.4,380.8,398.5,387,380.7,])
array_1_name = "Air pollution in Somerset, Pennsylvania"
array_2_name = "Violent crime rates"

# 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?

Your rating is much appreciated!


Correlation ID: 1429 · Black Variable ID: 22245 · Red Variable ID: 20220
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0