about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #3,080 · 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 physicists in Michigan and the second variable is Google searches for 'smol'.  The chart goes from 2004 to 2022, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As the number of physicists in Michigan grows, so does the gravitational pull of their big brains. This tiny but mighty force attracts all things 'smol,' including the interest of internet users. It's a case of scientific minds making 'smol' matters feel like a quantum leap in importance.

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Prompt: Generate an image representing a vibrant Michigan classroom where a group of physicists are engaged in discussions and experiments, surrounded by cutting-edge equipment. Show the Google search bar in the corner of the room with a surge in searches for 'smol.' Capture the bustling laboratory atmosphere as a tiny particle becomes "smol" due to a quantum entanglement experiment, captivating the attention of the physicists and leading to a nationwide fascination with all things small. Illustrate the newfound love for tiny creatures and mini desserts spreading like wildfire, as the universe seemingly responds to the physicists' experiments by making everything around them adorable. The image can showcase the physicists collaborating around advanced lab equipment in a lively classroom setting. It should convey the sense of excitement and curiosity as the physicists conduct their quantum entanglement experiment. Additionally, depict the moment when the world is seemingly transformed as a tiny particle becomes "smol," capturing the physicists' awe and the emergence of a widespread fondness for small things. 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 physicists in Michigan and Google searches for 'smol'. 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: a funny image macro A Discovery magazine cover image a Polaroid photo Sci-fi fantacy Whimsical illustration
ChatGPT: A Discovery magazine cover image

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 physicists in Michigan and Google searches for 'smol', in the following situation: Because the influx of physicists in Michigan led to an increase in "smol" Google searches, as more physicists meant more "quantum entanglement" experiments. This caused tiny particles to become "smol," sparking a nationwide fascination with all things small, including tiny animals and mini desserts. It's like the universe said, "Physicists, you can try to understand me, but I'll make everything adorable in the process!". Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a vibrant Michigan classroom, a group of physicists is engaged in intense discussions and experiments, surrounded by cutting-edge equipment. As they work tirelessly, the Google search bar in the corner of the room shows a surge in searches for 'smol.' In the midst of the bustling laboratory, a tiny particle becomes "smol" due to a quantum entanglement experiment, captivating the attention of the physicists and leading to a nationwide fascination with all things small. This newfound love for tiny creatures and mini desserts spreads like wildfire, as the universe seemingly responds to the physicists' experiments by making everything around them adorable.

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: [ A Discovery magazine cover image ] and depicting this scene: In a vibrant Michigan classroom, a group of physicists is engaged in intense discussions and experiments, surrounded by cutting-edge equipment. As they work tirelessly, the Google search bar in the corner of the room shows a surge in searches for 'smol.' In the midst of the bustling laboratory, a tiny particle becomes "smol" due to a quantum entanglement experiment, captivating the attention of the physicists and leading to a nationwide fascination with all things small. This newfound love for tiny creatures and mini desserts spreads like wildfire, as the universe seemingly responds to the physicists' experiments by making everything around them adorable. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Prompt: Generate an image representing a vibrant Michigan classroom where a group of physicists are engaged in discussions and experiments, surrounded by cutting-edge equipment. Show the Google search bar in the corner of the room with a surge in searches for 'smol.' Capture the bustling laboratory atmosphere as a tiny particle becomes "smol" due to a quantum entanglement experiment, captivating the attention of the physicists and leading to a nationwide fascination with all things small. Illustrate the newfound love for tiny creatures and mini desserts spreading like wildfire, as the universe seemingly responds to the physicists' experiments by making everything around them adorable. The image can showcase the physicists collaborating around advanced lab equipment in a lively classroom setting. It should convey the sense of excitement and curiosity as the physicists conduct their quantum entanglement experiment. Additionally, depict the moment when the world is seemingly transformed as a tiny particle becomes "smol," capturing the physicists' awe and the emergence of a widespread fondness for small things.

*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 physicists in Michigan caused smol (Google searches for 'smol') to increase.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Quantum Quirkiness: The 'Smol' Impact of Physicists in Michigan on Google Searches

Journal of Quirky Quantum Studies

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 witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.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 physicists in Michigan and Google searches for 'smol'. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Include a pun in the title.

Your research team used data from Bureau of Larbor Statistics and Google Trends to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9379333 and p < 0.01 for 2004 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]]
"Quantum Quirkiness: The 'Smol' Impact of Physicists in Michigan on Google Searches"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research explores the peculiar relationship between the number of physicists in Michigan and Google searches for the term 'smol'. Leveraging data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Google Trends, our team delved into the nexus of quantum physics and internet linguistic trends. Surprisingly, we discovered a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.9379333 and p < 0.01 between the two variables from the period of 2004 to 2022. Our findings not only shed light on the whimsical interplay of scientific pursuits and online colloquial expressions but also highlight the curious impact of physics on digital culture. Join us as we unravel the 'smol' mysteries of quantum quirkiness in the heart of the Great Lakes State.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.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 physicists in Michigan and Google searches for 'smol'. Make lots of 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]]
"Quantum Quirkiness: The 'Smol' Impact of Physicists in Michigan on Google Searches"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research explores the peculiar relationship between the number of physicists in Michigan and Google searches for the term 'smol'. Leveraging data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Google Trends, our team delved into the nexus of quantum physics and internet linguistic trends. Surprisingly, we discovered a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.9379333 and p < 0.01 between the two variables from the period of 2004 to 2022. Our findings not only shed light on the whimsical interplay of scientific pursuits and online colloquial expressions but also highlight the curious impact of physics on digital culture. Join us as we unravel the 'smol' mysteries of quantum quirkiness in the heart of the Great Lakes State.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

Uniting the seemingly disparate realms of quantum physics and internet culture, this research investigates the unexpected connection between the number of physicists in the great state of Michigan and the frequency of Google searches for the term 'smol'. One might ponder how these two seemingly unrelated subjects could intersect, but as we wade into the depths of this investigation, the threads of correlation weave a compelling tale.

Quantum physics, with its mind-bending concepts and elusive particles, has long captured the imagination of both scientists and laypersons alike. Meanwhile, the internet, with its vast digital expanse, hosts a myriad of linguistic trends that ebb and flow like the tides of quantum uncertainty. As we delve into this curious territory, the blend of serious scientific inquiry and whimsical linguistic expression promises to unveil a tapestry of unexpected relations.

Our foray into this unconventional pairing was sparked by a curious observation: a notable spike in Google searches for 'smol' coinciding with the influx of physicists in Michigan. Perhaps 'smol' serves as a quantum attractor for physicists, drawing them to the land of the Great Lakes like moths to a linguistic flame. But as we eschew speculation in favor of empirical analysis, the statistical dance between these variables leaps to the forefront.

Beyond the whimsy and apparent incongruity lies a richer tapestry of meaning. The fervent curiosity driving the pursuit of scientific knowledge and the playful utterances of online denizens collide in a peculiar dance. As we embark on this voyage, we aim to not only unravel the statistical underpinnings but also to appreciate the intriguing interplay of human expression and scientific endeavor.

Our earnest endeavor aims to shed light on the playful interplay of linguistic trends and scientific pursuits, perhaps unveiling a lighthearted dimension of the solemn realms of physics research. Through this exploration, we strive to present a compelling case for the manifold and unexpected ways in which scientific pursuits intersect with the digital lingua franca. So, strap in and prepare to journey through the quantum quirkiness that lies at the nexus of physics and 'smol' linguistic musings in the heart of Michigan.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.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 physicists in Michigan and Google searches for 'smol'. Make lots of 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 you might move on to cartoons and children's shows that you watched for research.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Quantum Quirkiness: The 'Smol' Impact of Physicists in Michigan on Google Searches"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research explores the peculiar relationship between the number of physicists in Michigan and Google searches for the term 'smol'. Leveraging data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Google Trends, our team delved into the nexus of quantum physics and internet linguistic trends. Surprisingly, we discovered a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.9379333 and p < 0.01 between the two variables from the period of 2004 to 2022. Our findings not only shed light on the whimsical interplay of scientific pursuits and online colloquial expressions but also highlight the curious impact of physics on digital culture. Join us as we unravel the 'smol' mysteries of quantum quirkiness in the heart of the Great Lakes State.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
Uniting the seemingly disparate realms of quantum physics and internet culture, this research investigates the unexpected connection between the number of physicists in the great state of Michigan and the frequency of Google searches for the term 'smol'. One might ponder how these two seemingly unrelated subjects could intersect, but as we wade into the depths of this investigation, the threads of correlation weave a compelling tale.
Quantum physics, with its mind-bending concepts and elusive particles, has long captured the imagination of both scientists and laypersons alike. Meanwhile, the internet, with its vast digital expanse, hosts a myriad of linguistic trends that ebb and flow like the tides of quantum uncertainty. As we delve into this curious territory, the blend of serious scientific inquiry and whimsical linguistic expression promises to unveil a tapestry of unexpected relations.
Our foray into this unconventional pairing was sparked by a curious observation: a notable spike in Google searches for 'smol' coinciding with the influx of physicists in Michigan. Perhaps 'smol' serves as a quantum attractor for physicists, drawing them to the land of the Great Lakes like moths to a linguistic flame. But as we eschew speculation in favor of empirical analysis, the statistical dance between these variables leaps to the forefront.
Beyond the whimsy and apparent incongruity lies a richer tapestry of meaning. The fervent curiosity driving the pursuit of scientific knowledge and the playful utterances of online denizens collide in a peculiar dance. As we embark on this voyage, we aim to not only unravel the statistical underpinnings but also to appreciate the intriguing interplay of human expression and scientific endeavor.

Our earnest endeavor aims to shed light on the playful interplay of linguistic trends and scientific pursuits, perhaps unveiling a lighthearted dimension of the solemn realms of physics research. Through this exploration, we strive to present a compelling case for the manifold and unexpected ways in which scientific pursuits intersect with the digital lingua franca. So, strap in and prepare to journey through the quantum quirkiness that lies at the nexus of physics and 'smol' linguistic musings in the heart of Michigan.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

To immerse ourselves in the whimsical and perplexing realm of the correlation between the number of physicists in Michigan and the frequency of Google searches for the term 'smol', let us first examine the serious literature on linguistic trends, quantum physics, and potentially related fields. Smith and Doe (2010) delve into the intricacies of internet linguistics, uncovering the peculiar manner in which colloquial expressions ebb and flow in the digital expanse. Meanwhile, Jones (2015) presents a comprehensive analysis of the labor market for physicists, shedding light on the geographical distribution of these scientific minds.

However, as we traverse the theoretical landscape, we must not neglect the potential influence of cultural phenomena on our inquiry. In "The Physics of Superheroes" by Kakalios (2009), the author intertwines the extraordinary feats of fictional superheroes with the principles of physics, perhaps hinting at the unexplored connection between fantastical narratives and scientific pursuits. Furthermore, the works of Crichton (2006) and Clarke (1968) invite us to consider the nuanced intersections of science fiction and real-world scientific endeavors, providing a rich backdrop for our investigation.

Leaping into the unexpected, we also turn our attention to unconventional sources of insight. Cartoons such as "The Adventures of Jimmy Neutron: Boy Genius" and "Dexter's Laboratory" offer a playful window into the pursuit of scientific knowledge, uncovering the potential impact of childhood influences on linguistic predilections. As we navigate this literary menagerie, we are poised to unearth the quirky and delightful nuances of our research pursuit.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.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 physicists in Michigan and Google searches for 'smol'. Make lots of 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 Bureau of Larbor Statistics and Google Trends . You used data from 2004 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]]
"Quantum Quirkiness: The 'Smol' Impact of Physicists in Michigan on Google Searches"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research explores the peculiar relationship between the number of physicists in Michigan and Google searches for the term 'smol'. Leveraging data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Google Trends, our team delved into the nexus of quantum physics and internet linguistic trends. Surprisingly, we discovered a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.9379333 and p < 0.01 between the two variables from the period of 2004 to 2022. Our findings not only shed light on the whimsical interplay of scientific pursuits and online colloquial expressions but also highlight the curious impact of physics on digital culture. Join us as we unravel the 'smol' mysteries of quantum quirkiness in the heart of the Great Lakes State.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
Uniting the seemingly disparate realms of quantum physics and internet culture, this research investigates the unexpected connection between the number of physicists in the great state of Michigan and the frequency of Google searches for the term 'smol'. One might ponder how these two seemingly unrelated subjects could intersect, but as we wade into the depths of this investigation, the threads of correlation weave a compelling tale.
Quantum physics, with its mind-bending concepts and elusive particles, has long captured the imagination of both scientists and laypersons alike. Meanwhile, the internet, with its vast digital expanse, hosts a myriad of linguistic trends that ebb and flow like the tides of quantum uncertainty. As we delve into this curious territory, the blend of serious scientific inquiry and whimsical linguistic expression promises to unveil a tapestry of unexpected relations.
Our foray into this unconventional pairing was sparked by a curious observation: a notable spike in Google searches for 'smol' coinciding with the influx of physicists in Michigan. Perhaps 'smol' serves as a quantum attractor for physicists, drawing them to the land of the Great Lakes like moths to a linguistic flame. But as we eschew speculation in favor of empirical analysis, the statistical dance between these variables leaps to the forefront.
Beyond the whimsy and apparent incongruity lies a richer tapestry of meaning. The fervent curiosity driving the pursuit of scientific knowledge and the playful utterances of online denizens collide in a peculiar dance. As we embark on this voyage, we aim to not only unravel the statistical underpinnings but also to appreciate the intriguing interplay of human expression and scientific endeavor.

Our earnest endeavor aims to shed light on the playful interplay of linguistic trends and scientific pursuits, perhaps unveiling a lighthearted dimension of the solemn realms of physics research. Through this exploration, we strive to present a compelling case for the manifold and unexpected ways in which scientific pursuits intersect with the digital lingua franca. So, strap in and prepare to journey through the quantum quirkiness that lies at the nexus of physics and 'smol' linguistic musings in the heart of Michigan.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To embark on this unconventional investigation, we employed a mishmash of methodological approaches that could provide a robust understanding of the nexus between the number of physicists in Michigan and Google searches for the endearing term 'smol'. Our data sources traversed the digital landscape, with the Bureau of Labor Statistics offering a window into the ebb and flow of physicists in Michigan, while Google Trends provided a digital sonar for the frequency of searches for 'smol' from 2004 to 2022.

The journey of data acquisition began with a systematic trawl through the Bureau of Labor Statistics website, where we wrangled the numbers of physicists in Michigan over the years. After donning our statistical spectacles and employing various computational apparatus, we plotted the temporal distribution of these physicists with the precision of a quantum experiment. Meanwhile, our quest for 'smol' in the vast ocean of the internet led us to the depths of Google Trends, where we gauged the rise and fall of this endearing term to encapsulate the linguistic zeitgeist.

With these disparate datasets in hand, we summoned the statistical gods and probed the depths of correlation analysis to discern the enigmatic interconnections. Utilizing the arcane arts of statistical software, we computed the correlation coefficient and its faithful companion, the p-value, to illuminate the statistical significance of the relationship between physicists and 'smol' searches. Our analytical journey sought patterns, anomalies, and a touch of whimsy, akin to quantum particles revealing their mystique in a chamber of statistical scrutiny.

However, as we braved the treacherous seas of academia, we encountered the siren's song of potential confounding variables. To navigate this perilous journey, we employed multiple regression analysis like a seasoned navigator charting a course through uncharted statistical waters. This voyage allowed us to control for the vagaries of time and external influences, ensuring that our findings resonated with the harmonious hum of statistical rigor.

Furthermore, armed with our findings, we unleashed the arsenal of visual storytelling, crafting plots and graphs that conveyed the intricate dance of physicists and 'smol' in a manner befitting their unexpected camaraderie. Our research methodology thus encapsulated the spirit of scientific inquiry while embracing the whimsical wonders that lay hidden within the statistical labyrinth.

In summary, our methodological odyssey combined rigorous statistical analysis with the whimsy of linguistic exploration, creating a tapestry of empirical insights that dances with the quirkiness of quantum phenomena. So, with data in hand and statistical sails unfurled, we set sail to unravel the 'smol' mysteries that beckon at the interstice of physics and playful linguistic expression in the heart of Michigan.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.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 physicists in Michigan and Google searches for 'smol'. Make lots of 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 Bureau of Larbor Statistics and Google Trends .

For the time period 2004 to 2022, you found a correlation 0.9379333, r-squared of 0.8797188, 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]]
"Quantum Quirkiness: The 'Smol' Impact of Physicists in Michigan on Google Searches"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research explores the peculiar relationship between the number of physicists in Michigan and Google searches for the term 'smol'. Leveraging data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Google Trends, our team delved into the nexus of quantum physics and internet linguistic trends. Surprisingly, we discovered a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.9379333 and p < 0.01 between the two variables from the period of 2004 to 2022. Our findings not only shed light on the whimsical interplay of scientific pursuits and online colloquial expressions but also highlight the curious impact of physics on digital culture. Join us as we unravel the 'smol' mysteries of quantum quirkiness in the heart of the Great Lakes State.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
Uniting the seemingly disparate realms of quantum physics and internet culture, this research investigates the unexpected connection between the number of physicists in the great state of Michigan and the frequency of Google searches for the term 'smol'. One might ponder how these two seemingly unrelated subjects could intersect, but as we wade into the depths of this investigation, the threads of correlation weave a compelling tale.
Quantum physics, with its mind-bending concepts and elusive particles, has long captured the imagination of both scientists and laypersons alike. Meanwhile, the internet, with its vast digital expanse, hosts a myriad of linguistic trends that ebb and flow like the tides of quantum uncertainty. As we delve into this curious territory, the blend of serious scientific inquiry and whimsical linguistic expression promises to unveil a tapestry of unexpected relations.
Our foray into this unconventional pairing was sparked by a curious observation: a notable spike in Google searches for 'smol' coinciding with the influx of physicists in Michigan. Perhaps 'smol' serves as a quantum attractor for physicists, drawing them to the land of the Great Lakes like moths to a linguistic flame. But as we eschew speculation in favor of empirical analysis, the statistical dance between these variables leaps to the forefront.
Beyond the whimsy and apparent incongruity lies a richer tapestry of meaning. The fervent curiosity driving the pursuit of scientific knowledge and the playful utterances of online denizens collide in a peculiar dance. As we embark on this voyage, we aim to not only unravel the statistical underpinnings but also to appreciate the intriguing interplay of human expression and scientific endeavor.

Our earnest endeavor aims to shed light on the playful interplay of linguistic trends and scientific pursuits, perhaps unveiling a lighthearted dimension of the solemn realms of physics research. Through this exploration, we strive to present a compelling case for the manifold and unexpected ways in which scientific pursuits intersect with the digital lingua franca. So, strap in and prepare to journey through the quantum quirkiness that lies at the nexus of physics and 'smol' linguistic musings in the heart of Michigan.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

Our investigation into the correlation between the number of physicists in Michigan and Google searches for the term 'smol' has yielded some delightfully quirky results. We found a strikingly high correlation coefficient of 0.9379333 and an r-squared value of 0.8797188, with a p-value of less than 0.01 during the period from 2004 to 2022. The strength of this association is truly astounding, mirroring the resilience of a particle in a quantum superposition.

Figure 1 depicts the scatterplot showcasing the strong correlation between the variables. It is evident from this figure that as the number of physicists in Michigan increases, there is a corresponding surge in Google searches for the endearing term 'smol'. This relationship is not just statistically significant but also teeming with a delightful whimsy that beckons one to delve deeper into the enigmatic depths of quantum quirkiness.

The robust correlation uncovered in our analysis hints at a resonating effervescence between the esoteric pursuits of physicists and the lighthearted colloquialisms of internet culture. It appears that the allure of quantum mysteries exerts a gravitational pull on linguistic expressions, leading to a synchronized dance of scientific inquisitiveness and digital vernacular.

The seemingly disparate worlds of physics and internet linguistics have collided in a synchrony that leaves us marveling at the lively interplay of human expression and scientific curiosity. The unexpectedness of this correlation is akin to stumbling upon a lighthearted jest hidden within the formalism of quantum mechanics—a delightful surprise that beckons us to embrace the whimsy amidst the rigors of scholarly inquiry.

Through these findings, we not only illuminate the unlikely intersection of scientific pursuits and online linguistic trends but also usher in a new era of appreciating the enchanting dance between the serious and the playful in the grand tapestry of human endeavors. Join us in celebrating the 'smol' impact of physicists in Michigan on Google searches as we navigate the quantum quirkiness that imbues both the scientific and digital realms.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.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 physicists in Michigan and Google searches for 'smol'. Make lots of 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]]
"Quantum Quirkiness: The 'Smol' Impact of Physicists in Michigan on Google Searches"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research explores the peculiar relationship between the number of physicists in Michigan and Google searches for the term 'smol'. Leveraging data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Google Trends, our team delved into the nexus of quantum physics and internet linguistic trends. Surprisingly, we discovered a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.9379333 and p < 0.01 between the two variables from the period of 2004 to 2022. Our findings not only shed light on the whimsical interplay of scientific pursuits and online colloquial expressions but also highlight the curious impact of physics on digital culture. Join us as we unravel the 'smol' mysteries of quantum quirkiness in the heart of the Great Lakes State.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
To immerse ourselves in the whimsical and perplexing realm of the correlation between the number of physicists in Michigan and the frequency of Google searches for the term 'smol', let us first examine the serious literature on linguistic trends, quantum physics, and potentially related fields. Smith and Doe (2010) delve into the intricacies of internet linguistics, uncovering the peculiar manner in which colloquial expressions ebb and flow in the digital expanse. Meanwhile, Jones (2015) presents a comprehensive analysis of the labor market for physicists, shedding light on the geographical distribution of these scientific minds.
However, as we traverse the theoretical landscape, we must not neglect the potential influence of cultural phenomena on our inquiry. In "The Physics of Superheroes" by Kakalios (2009), the author intertwines the extraordinary feats of fictional superheroes with the principles of physics, perhaps hinting at the unexplored connection between fantastical narratives and scientific pursuits. Furthermore, the works of Crichton (2006) and Clarke (1968) invite us to consider the nuanced intersections of science fiction and real-world scientific endeavors, providing a rich backdrop for our investigation.
Leaping into the unexpected, we also turn our attention to unconventional sources of insight. Cartoons such as "The Adventures of Jimmy Neutron: Boy Genius" and "Dexter's Laboratory" offer a playful window into the pursuit of scientific knowledge, uncovering the potential impact of childhood influences on linguistic predilections. As we navigate this literary menagerie, we are poised to unearth the quirky and delightful nuances of our research pursuit.

[[RESULTS]]
Our investigation into the correlation between the number of physicists in Michigan and Google searches for the term 'smol' has yielded some delightfully quirky results. We found a strikingly high correlation coefficient of 0.9379333 and an r-squared value of 0.8797188, with a p-value of less than 0.01 during the period from 2004 to 2022. The strength of this association is truly astounding, mirroring the resilience of a particle in a quantum superposition.
Figure 1 depicts the scatterplot showcasing the strong correlation between the variables. It is evident from this figure that as the number of physicists in Michigan increases, there is a corresponding surge in Google searches for the endearing term 'smol'. This relationship is not just statistically significant but also teeming with a delightful whimsy that beckons one to delve deeper into the enigmatic depths of quantum quirkiness.
The robust correlation uncovered in our analysis hints at a resonating effervescence between the esoteric pursuits of physicists and the lighthearted colloquialisms of internet culture. It appears that the allure of quantum mysteries exerts a gravitational pull on linguistic expressions, leading to a synchronized dance of scientific inquisitiveness and digital vernacular.
The seemingly disparate worlds of physics and internet linguistics have collided in a synchrony that leaves us marveling at the lively interplay of human expression and scientific curiosity. The unexpectedness of this correlation is akin to stumbling upon a lighthearted jest hidden within the formalism of quantum mechanics—a delightful surprise that beckons us to embrace the whimsy amidst the rigors of scholarly inquiry.
Through these findings, we not only illuminate the unlikely intersection of scientific pursuits and online linguistic trends but also usher in a new era of appreciating the enchanting dance between the serious and the playful in the grand tapestry of human endeavors. Join us in celebrating the 'smol' impact of physicists in Michigan on Google searches as we navigate the quantum quirkiness that imbues both the scientific and digital realms.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Our research has unearthed a fascinating connection between the number of physicists in Michigan and the frequency of Google searches for the term 'smol', shedding light on the quirky interplay of scientific pursuits and internet linguistic trends. Surprisingly, our findings not only corroborate prior research on internet linguistics and labor market analysis but also reveal unexpected parallels to the world of fiction and childhood influences.

One of the most unexpected yet intriguing aspects of our study is the robust correlation we observed between physicists in Michigan and Google searches for 'smol'. This offbeat relationship defies traditional explanations and beckons us to consider the whimsical and delightful nuances that infuse the interface of scientific exploration and online colloquialism. Just as Kakalios (2009) intriguingly intertwines the physics of superheroes with real-world scientific principles, our findings whimsically hint at the unexplored connections between scientific pursuits and linguistic expressions.

Our results also align with the labor market analysis conducted by Jones (2015), providing empirical support for the geographical distribution of physicists and their curious impact on Google searches for the endearing term 'smol'. This unexpected resonance between the esoteric pursuits of physicists and the lighthearted expressions of the digital landscape is akin to stumbling upon a hidden joke within the rigors of scholarly inquiry—a playful surprise that invites us to marvel at the whimsy coexisting amidst the serious pursuit of knowledge.

Moreover, our discovery of a statistically significant correlation invites us to consider the potential influence of childhood influences on linguistic predilections, as hinted by the playful cartoons "The Adventures of Jimmy Neutron: Boy Genius" and "Dexter's Laboratory". The unexpected linkage between the world of science and childhood nostalgia underscores the multifaceted nature of our findings and prompts us to delve deeper into the enigmatic depths of quantum quirkiness emboldened by the playful undercurrents of human expression and scientific curiosity.

In conclusion, our study not only contributes to a deeper understanding of the endearing interplay of scientific pursuits and online linguistic trends but also invites us to embrace the delightful surprises that lurk at the nexus of the serious and the playful in the grand tapestry of human endeavors. Through our investigation of the 'smol' impact of physicists in Michigan on Google searches, we illuminate a whimsical resonance that transcends the customary confines of scientific inquiry and invites us to revel in the enchanting dance between scientific pursuits and digital vernacular.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.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 physicists in Michigan and Google searches for 'smol'. Make lots of 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]]
"Quantum Quirkiness: The 'Smol' Impact of Physicists in Michigan on Google Searches"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research explores the peculiar relationship between the number of physicists in Michigan and Google searches for the term 'smol'. Leveraging data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Google Trends, our team delved into the nexus of quantum physics and internet linguistic trends. Surprisingly, we discovered a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.9379333 and p < 0.01 between the two variables from the period of 2004 to 2022. Our findings not only shed light on the whimsical interplay of scientific pursuits and online colloquial expressions but also highlight the curious impact of physics on digital culture. Join us as we unravel the 'smol' mysteries of quantum quirkiness in the heart of the Great Lakes State.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
Uniting the seemingly disparate realms of quantum physics and internet culture, this research investigates the unexpected connection between the number of physicists in the great state of Michigan and the frequency of Google searches for the term 'smol'. One might ponder how these two seemingly unrelated subjects could intersect, but as we wade into the depths of this investigation, the threads of correlation weave a compelling tale.
Quantum physics, with its mind-bending concepts and elusive particles, has long captured the imagination of both scientists and laypersons alike. Meanwhile, the internet, with its vast digital expanse, hosts a myriad of linguistic trends that ebb and flow like the tides of quantum uncertainty. As we delve into this curious territory, the blend of serious scientific inquiry and whimsical linguistic expression promises to unveil a tapestry of unexpected relations.
Our foray into this unconventional pairing was sparked by a curious observation: a notable spike in Google searches for 'smol' coinciding with the influx of physicists in Michigan. Perhaps 'smol' serves as a quantum attractor for physicists, drawing them to the land of the Great Lakes like moths to a linguistic flame. But as we eschew speculation in favor of empirical analysis, the statistical dance between these variables leaps to the forefront.
Beyond the whimsy and apparent incongruity lies a richer tapestry of meaning. The fervent curiosity driving the pursuit of scientific knowledge and the playful utterances of online denizens collide in a peculiar dance. As we embark on this voyage, we aim to not only unravel the statistical underpinnings but also to appreciate the intriguing interplay of human expression and scientific endeavor.

Our earnest endeavor aims to shed light on the playful interplay of linguistic trends and scientific pursuits, perhaps unveiling a lighthearted dimension of the solemn realms of physics research. Through this exploration, we strive to present a compelling case for the manifold and unexpected ways in which scientific pursuits intersect with the digital lingua franca. So, strap in and prepare to journey through the quantum quirkiness that lies at the nexus of physics and 'smol' linguistic musings in the heart of Michigan.

[[RESULTS]]
Our investigation into the correlation between the number of physicists in Michigan and Google searches for the term 'smol' has yielded some delightfully quirky results. We found a strikingly high correlation coefficient of 0.9379333 and an r-squared value of 0.8797188, with a p-value of less than 0.01 during the period from 2004 to 2022. The strength of this association is truly astounding, mirroring the resilience of a particle in a quantum superposition.
Figure 1 depicts the scatterplot showcasing the strong correlation between the variables. It is evident from this figure that as the number of physicists in Michigan increases, there is a corresponding surge in Google searches for the endearing term 'smol'. This relationship is not just statistically significant but also teeming with a delightful whimsy that beckons one to delve deeper into the enigmatic depths of quantum quirkiness.
The robust correlation uncovered in our analysis hints at a resonating effervescence between the esoteric pursuits of physicists and the lighthearted colloquialisms of internet culture. It appears that the allure of quantum mysteries exerts a gravitational pull on linguistic expressions, leading to a synchronized dance of scientific inquisitiveness and digital vernacular.
The seemingly disparate worlds of physics and internet linguistics have collided in a synchrony that leaves us marveling at the lively interplay of human expression and scientific curiosity. The unexpectedness of this correlation is akin to stumbling upon a lighthearted jest hidden within the formalism of quantum mechanics—a delightful surprise that beckons us to embrace the whimsy amidst the rigors of scholarly inquiry.
Through these findings, we not only illuminate the unlikely intersection of scientific pursuits and online linguistic trends but also usher in a new era of appreciating the enchanting dance between the serious and the playful in the grand tapestry of human endeavors. Join us in celebrating the 'smol' impact of physicists in Michigan on Google searches as we navigate the quantum quirkiness that imbues both the scientific and digital realms.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our research has uncovered a delightfully quirky and statistically significant relationship between the number of physicists in Michigan and Google searches for the term 'smol'. The robust correlation coefficient of 0.9379333 and a p-value of less than 0.01 from 2004 to 2022 speaks volumes about the peculiar dance of quantum quirkiness that transcends the boundaries of scientific inquiry and internet linguistic trends.

As we ponder the implications of these findings, one cannot help but marvel at the whimsical interplay of serious physics and playful online expressions. It's as if the quantum superposition of physicists in Michigan exerts a charming gravitational pull on the digital colloquialism, leading to a synchronized waltz of esoteric pursuits and linguistic effervescence.

The scatterplot showcasing the surge in 'smol' searches as the number of physicists increases is a visual testament to the unexpected synchrony of these seemingly disparate realms. One might say it's a case of quantum entanglement between the scientific and the digital, where the allure of quantum mysteries intertwines with the lighthearted musings of internet culture, creating a fusion of enchanting dimensions.

While we celebrate the 'smol' impact of physicists in Michigan on Google searches, it's essential to recognize the inherent charm in this correlation, akin to stumbling upon a delightful surprise within the formalism of statistical analysis.

Given the compelling nature of our findings and the depth of this marvelously quirky correlation, we are confident in asserting that no further research in this area is needed. Our exploration has not only shed light on the whimsical interplay of scientific pursuits and online colloquial expressions but also sparked a new appreciation for the lighthearted jest hidden within the realms of quantum quirkiness.


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 Quantum Quirkiness: The 'Smol' Impact of Physicists in Michigan on Google Searches. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

Journal of Quirky Quantum Studies


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 Quantum Quirkiness: The 'Smol' Impact of Physicists in Michigan on Google Searches. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Center for Quantum Quirkiness 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 Quantum Quirkiness: The 'Smol' Impact of Physicists in Michigan on Google Searches with an abstract of This research explores the peculiar relationship between the number of physicists in Michigan and Google searches for the term 'smol'. Leveraging data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Google Trends, our team delved into the nexus of quantum physics and internet linguistic trends. Surprisingly, we discovered a statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.9379333 and p < 0.01 between the two variables from the period of 2004 to 2022. Our findings not only shed light on the whimsical interplay of scientific pursuits and online colloquial expressions but also highlight the curious impact of physics on digital culture. Join us as we unravel the 'smol' mysteries of quantum quirkiness in the heart of the Great Lakes State.

ChatGPT:

Michigan physicists, Google searches, 'smol', Bureau of Labor Statistics, Google Trends, quantum physics, internet linguistic trends, correlation coefficient, physics impact on digital culture, Great Lakes State, scientific pursuits, online colloquial expressions

*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 physicists in Michigan
Detailed data title: BLS estimate of physicists in Michigan
Source: Bureau of Larbor Statistics
See what else correlates with The number of physicists in Michigan

Google searches for 'smol'
Detailed data title: Relative volume of Google searches for 'smol' (Worldwide, without quotes)
Source: Google Trends
Additional Info: Relative search volume (not absolute numbers)

See what else correlates with Google searches for 'smol'

Correlation r = 0.9379333 (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 = 0.8797188 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 88% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Google searches for 'smol') is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., The number of physicists in Michigan) over the 19 years from 2004 through 2022.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 3.07E-9. 0.0000000030673496501662390000
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 0.94 in 3.07E-7% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 326,014,349 random variables You don't actually need 326 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 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.

[ 0.84, 0.98 ] 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.
2004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022
The number of physicists in Michigan (Physicists)100260260280220260250210220260350380410580510530500500430
Google searches for 'smol' (Rel. search volume)12.2513.510.666712.166713.083318.519.520.333321.333326.532.08334674.833385.166786.333384.2589.083383.166775.4167




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.




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([100,260,260,280,220,260,250,210,220,260,350,380,410,580,510,530,500,500,430,])
array_2 = np.array([12.25,13.5,10.6667,12.1667,13.0833,18.5,19.5,20.3333,21.3333,26.5,32.0833,46,74.8333,85.1667,86.3333,84.25,89.0833,83.1667,75.4167,])
array_1_name = "The number of physicists in Michigan"
array_2_name = "Google searches for 'smol'"

# 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?

Hats off to you for rating!


Correlation ID: 3080 · Black Variable ID: 9619 · Red Variable ID: 1370
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0