about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #5,508 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Kentucky and the second variable is Total Number of Successful Mount Everest Climbs.  The chart goes from 1976 to 2011, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As more people in Kentucky voted for the Democrat Presidential candidate, the collective positive energy and determination somehow made its way to the Himalayas, inspiring climbers to reach new heights of success on Mount Everest. It's as if the political support created a 'mountain' of motivation for these brave individuals, propelling them upwards towards victory! Who knew that the path to the White House could also lead to the world's highest peak!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image of a futuristic holographic display, featuring a large silhouette of Mount Everest in the background with a crowd of cheering voters from Kentucky in the foreground. The holographic scene should capture the sense of unity and empowerment, as the voters' energy is visually depicted as a radiant glow that connects with the Himalayan climbers reaching the summit. The scene would exude a high-tech aesthetic, with sleek, transparent interfaces and vibrant energy connecting the two distant locations in a visually engaging and conceptually striking manner. 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: Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Kentucky and Total Number of Successful Mount Everest Climbs. 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: High-tech Parallax art Charcoal Symbolism High-tech
ChatGPT: High-tech

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 Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Kentucky and Total Number of Successful Mount Everest Climbs, in the following situation: As more people in Kentucky voted for the Democrat Presidential candidate, the collective positive energy and determination somehow made its way to the Himalayas, inspiring climbers to reach new heights of success on Mount Everest. It's as if the political support created a 'mountain' of motivation for these brave individuals, propelling them upwards towards victory! Who knew that the path to the White House could also lead to the world's highest peak!. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: Amidst the rolling hills of Kentucky, a sea of voters proudly cast their ballots for the Democratic Presidential candidate, their collective energy propelling a wave of positive vibes. Somewhere in the distant snow-capped Himalayas, climbers, fueled by the newfound momentum, triumphantly conquer the towering peak of Mount Everest, basking in the glory of their successful ascent. The political support from Kentucky seems to have created a conduit of motivation, bridging the gap between democracy and mountain triumph.

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: [ High-tech ] and depicting this scene: Amidst the rolling hills of Kentucky, a sea of voters proudly cast their ballots for the Democratic Presidential candidate, their collective energy propelling a wave of positive vibes. Somewhere in the distant snow-capped Himalayas, climbers, fueled by the newfound momentum, triumphantly conquer the towering peak of Mount Everest, basking in the glory of their successful ascent. The political support from Kentucky seems to have created a conduit of motivation, bridging the gap between democracy and mountain triumph. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image of a futuristic holographic display, featuring a large silhouette of Mount Everest in the background with a crowd of cheering voters from Kentucky in the foreground. The holographic scene should capture the sense of unity and empowerment, as the voters' energy is visually depicted as a radiant glow that connects with the Himalayan climbers reaching the summit. The scene would exude a high-tech aesthetic, with sleek, transparent interfaces and vibrant energy connecting the two distant locations in a visually engaging and conceptually striking manner.

*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 Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Kentucky caused Total Number of Successful Mount Everest Climbs to increase.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Dem Votes in Kentucky and Everest Climbs: A Rhyming Correlation

The Journal of Quirky Correlations

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 silly 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 Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Kentucky and Total Number of Successful Mount Everest Climbs. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Rhyme words in the title.

Your research team used data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and CBC to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.8882501 and p < 0.01 for 1976 to 2011.

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]]
Dem Votes in Kentucky and Everest Climbs: A Rhyming Correlation

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the surprising (and somewhat whimsical) relationship between the number of votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Kentucky and the total number of successful Mount Everest climbs. Drawing from data sources such as MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the CBC, our research team has identified a correlation coefficient of 0.8882501 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 1976 to 2011. Our findings present an intriguing connection between political preferences in the Bluegrass State and the Himalayan triumphs of intrepid climbers. The implications of our results are both comical and thought-provoking, shedding light on a correlation that is truly an "epic summit" in the realm of unexpected statistical relationships.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Kentucky and Total Number of Successful Mount Everest Climbs. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Dem Votes in Kentucky and Everest Climbs: A Rhyming Correlation

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the surprising (and somewhat whimsical) relationship between the number of votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Kentucky and the total number of successful Mount Everest climbs. Drawing from data sources such as MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the CBC, our research team has identified a correlation coefficient of 0.8882501 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 1976 to 2011. Our findings present an intriguing connection between political preferences in the Bluegrass State and the Himalayan triumphs of intrepid climbers. The implications of our results are both comical and thought-provoking, shedding light on a correlation that is truly an "epic summit" in the realm of unexpected statistical relationships.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

Nestled amongst the rolling hills of Kentucky, where the horses run and the banjos twang, sits a mystery as enigmatic as the secret recipes of Colonel Sanders – the uncanny relationship between votes for the Democrat presidential candidate and the number of successful Mount Everest climbs. As a team of intrepid researchers, we set out to unravel this delightful enigma, armed with nothing but data and a healthy dose of skepticism.

It is not often that statistical correlations lead us to ponder the whimsical connections between political preferences and extreme mountaineering feats. However, as the old adage goes, "correlation does not imply causation, but it sure does make for a great conversation starter at cocktail parties." Armed with an unshakeable sense of curiosity and a dash of humor, we embarked on our statistical odyssey, journeying through the maze of data points and error bars towards the summit of knowledge.

Oh, statistics! The fickle and capricious mistress of the scientific world. Like a siren luring researchers into the treacherous waters of significance testing, the field of statistics has long been a source of both enlightenment and befuddlement. As we delved into the depths of voting records and Himalayan expeditions, we found ourselves dancing with p-values and correlation coefficients, like spelunkers navigating the caverns of uncertainty.

The aim of our endeavor is not merely to uncover a statistical relationship, but to unravel a tale of two seemingly disparate entities merging in a poetic dance of numbers. What could possibly connect the political leanings of Kentucky voters to the feats of conquering the world's highest peak? The answer may not be as elusive as the Yeti, but it certainly holds a charm that is equally tantalizing.

So, ladies and gentlemen, fasten your seatbelts and prepare for a statistical rollercoaster ride through the Bluegrass State and the roof of the world. Our findings are bound to be as intriguing as a Bigfoot sighting in the White House – improbable, yet undeniably captivating. Join us as we embark on this journey of discovery, where the lighthearted nature of our research belies the serious implications of unexpected statistical relationships.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Kentucky and Total Number of Successful Mount Everest Climbs. 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]]
Dem Votes in Kentucky and Everest Climbs: A Rhyming Correlation

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the surprising (and somewhat whimsical) relationship between the number of votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Kentucky and the total number of successful Mount Everest climbs. Drawing from data sources such as MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the CBC, our research team has identified a correlation coefficient of 0.8882501 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 1976 to 2011. Our findings present an intriguing connection between political preferences in the Bluegrass State and the Himalayan triumphs of intrepid climbers. The implications of our results are both comical and thought-provoking, shedding light on a correlation that is truly an "epic summit" in the realm of unexpected statistical relationships.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
Nestled amongst the rolling hills of Kentucky, where the horses run and the banjos twang, sits a mystery as enigmatic as the secret recipes of Colonel Sanders – the uncanny relationship between votes for the Democrat presidential candidate and the number of successful Mount Everest climbs. As a team of intrepid researchers, we set out to unravel this delightful enigma, armed with nothing but data and a healthy dose of skepticism.
It is not often that statistical correlations lead us to ponder the whimsical connections between political preferences and extreme mountaineering feats. However, as the old adage goes, "correlation does not imply causation, but it sure does make for a great conversation starter at cocktail parties." Armed with an unshakeable sense of curiosity and a dash of humor, we embarked on our statistical odyssey, journeying through the maze of data points and error bars towards the summit of knowledge.
Oh, statistics! The fickle and capricious mistress of the scientific world. Like a siren luring researchers into the treacherous waters of significance testing, the field of statistics has long been a source of both enlightenment and befuddlement. As we delved into the depths of voting records and Himalayan expeditions, we found ourselves dancing with p-values and correlation coefficients, like spelunkers navigating the caverns of uncertainty.
The aim of our endeavor is not merely to uncover a statistical relationship, but to unravel a tale of two seemingly disparate entities merging in a poetic dance of numbers. What could possibly connect the political leanings of Kentucky voters to the feats of conquering the world's highest peak? The answer may not be as elusive as the Yeti, but it certainly holds a charm that is equally tantalizing.
So, ladies and gentlemen, fasten your seatbelts and prepare for a statistical rollercoaster ride through the Bluegrass State and the roof of the world. Our findings are bound to be as intriguing as a Bigfoot sighting in the White House – improbable, yet undeniably captivating. Join us as we embark on this journey of discovery, where the lighthearted nature of our research belies the serious implications of unexpected statistical relationships.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The pursuit of understanding the curious correlation between the number of votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Kentucky and the total number of successful Mount Everest climbs has led scholars to delve into a plethora of diverse and at times perplexing literature. In "The Statistical Union of Politics and Climbing," Smith explores the historical evolution of political ideologies in Kentucky and the growing significance of Everest expeditions in the modern era. While the author takes a comprehensive approach to the subject matter, the study fails to capture the whimsical essence that characterizes this unique statistical relationship. In stark contrast, Doe's "A Climber’s Guide to Political Victory" offers an insightful exploration of the psychological motivations underlying political allegiances and mountaineering triumphs, yet stops short of investigating their correlation. Jones, in "Democratic Ascents: An Unexpected Connection," takes a lighthearted approach to the topic, weaving a narrative that blends election results with mountaineering anecdotes, but lacks the empirical rigor necessary for academic scrutiny.

As we venture deeper into the realm of literature, it is essential to acknowledge the non-fiction works that have contributed tangentially to our understanding of this peculiar correlation. For instance, "Into Thin Air" by Jon Krakauer presents a gripping firsthand account of an ill-fated Everest expedition, offering insights into the challenges and triumphs of high-altitude mountaineering. Similarly, "What Happened" by Hillary Rodham Clinton provides a firsthand perspective on the intersection of politics and personal adversity, inviting readers to contemplate the resilience required to surmount seemingly insurmountable challenges.

In the realm of fiction, works such as "The Summiteer's Dilemma" by Arthur Conan Doyle and "Political Peaks: A Tale of Votes and Valleys" by Agatha Christie have captivated readers with their imaginative blending of electoral drama and mountainous conquests. While these literary works may seem far removed from the realm of scholarly inquiry, they have served as a source of inspiration and creative juxtaposition for our exploration of the unexpected statistical links between politics and climbing.

In an unexpected twist, our research team also delved into the world of animated television shows and children's programs in pursuit of unconventional insights. "Dora the Explorer" and "Paw Patrol" may appear unrelated to our scholarly objectives, but their themes of perseverance, teamwork, and adventure have offered unexpected parallels to the tenacity and camaraderie exhibited in both political campaigns and mountaineering expeditions.

In closing, our literature review has laid the groundwork for a comprehensive understanding of the multifaceted dimensions of the connection between votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Kentucky and successful Mount Everest climbs. As we transition to the empirical findings and analysis, we invite readers to embrace the lighthearted spirit of our inquiry while acknowledging the serious implications of our revelatory conclusions.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Kentucky and Total Number of Successful Mount Everest Climbs. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and CBC . You used data from 1976 to 2011

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]]
Dem Votes in Kentucky and Everest Climbs: A Rhyming Correlation

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the surprising (and somewhat whimsical) relationship between the number of votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Kentucky and the total number of successful Mount Everest climbs. Drawing from data sources such as MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the CBC, our research team has identified a correlation coefficient of 0.8882501 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 1976 to 2011. Our findings present an intriguing connection between political preferences in the Bluegrass State and the Himalayan triumphs of intrepid climbers. The implications of our results are both comical and thought-provoking, shedding light on a correlation that is truly an "epic summit" in the realm of unexpected statistical relationships.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
Nestled amongst the rolling hills of Kentucky, where the horses run and the banjos twang, sits a mystery as enigmatic as the secret recipes of Colonel Sanders – the uncanny relationship between votes for the Democrat presidential candidate and the number of successful Mount Everest climbs. As a team of intrepid researchers, we set out to unravel this delightful enigma, armed with nothing but data and a healthy dose of skepticism.
It is not often that statistical correlations lead us to ponder the whimsical connections between political preferences and extreme mountaineering feats. However, as the old adage goes, "correlation does not imply causation, but it sure does make for a great conversation starter at cocktail parties." Armed with an unshakeable sense of curiosity and a dash of humor, we embarked on our statistical odyssey, journeying through the maze of data points and error bars towards the summit of knowledge.
Oh, statistics! The fickle and capricious mistress of the scientific world. Like a siren luring researchers into the treacherous waters of significance testing, the field of statistics has long been a source of both enlightenment and befuddlement. As we delved into the depths of voting records and Himalayan expeditions, we found ourselves dancing with p-values and correlation coefficients, like spelunkers navigating the caverns of uncertainty.
The aim of our endeavor is not merely to uncover a statistical relationship, but to unravel a tale of two seemingly disparate entities merging in a poetic dance of numbers. What could possibly connect the political leanings of Kentucky voters to the feats of conquering the world's highest peak? The answer may not be as elusive as the Yeti, but it certainly holds a charm that is equally tantalizing.
So, ladies and gentlemen, fasten your seatbelts and prepare for a statistical rollercoaster ride through the Bluegrass State and the roof of the world. Our findings are bound to be as intriguing as a Bigfoot sighting in the White House – improbable, yet undeniably captivating. Join us as we embark on this journey of discovery, where the lighthearted nature of our research belies the serious implications of unexpected statistical relationships.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To quench our insatiable thirst for statistical adventure, we gallivanted through the digital archives of the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, the Harvard Dataverse, and the CBC, combing through datasets like treasure hunters in search of the Holy Grail of data points. Our research team, armed with nothing but a trusty compass and a fervent belief in the power of correlation, embarked on a journey that would make even Indiana Jones envious.

Diving into the fathomless sea of datasets, we cast our net wide, encompassing vast swaths of Kentucky voting records and Mount Everest expedition triumphs. With the precision of a diamond cutter and the determination of a bulldog, we painstakingly collected voting data from 1976 to 2011 and juxtaposed it with the conquests of the towering Himalayan peak.

Our statistical ballet commenced with a harmonious waltz between the number of votes garnered by the Democrat presidential candidate in Kentucky and the total number of successful Mount Everest climbs. Through the magic of correlation analysis, we parsed through the tangled underbrush of data, seeking a glimpse of the elusive unicorn of statistical significance.

Summoning the spirits of the great statisticians of yore, we invoked the righteous powers of Pearson and Spearman, conducting a ballet of statistical tests that would make even the most nimble-footed of dancers envious. With the elegance of a swan gliding across a serene lake, we scrutinized the raw data to uncover the hidden gems of correlation coefficients and p-values.

But lo and behold! A peculiar mirage emerged from the statistical desert – a correlation coefficient of 0.8882501, with a p-value less than 0.01. As we danced jubilantly around this statistical campfire, our whimsical findings painted a portrait of a relationship that tantalized our senses and tickled the very bounds of credulity.

At the conclusion of this maelstrom of statistical revelry, we gazed upon our findings with a mixture of incredulity and amusement. The unusual correlation between Democratic votes in Kentucky and successful Everest ascents stood before us like a mirthful chimera, imparting a sense of wonder that transcended the boundaries of statistical significance.

Undoubtedly, the methodology of our research journey can be likened to a wild expedition through uncharted territories, where the arcane rites of statistical analysis intertwined with the lighthearted spirit of discovery. Our merriment knew no bounds as we uncovered this delightful dance of numbers, a correlation so unexpected that it left us chuckling in sheer disbelief.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Kentucky and Total Number of Successful Mount Everest Climbs. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and CBC .

For the time period 1976 to 2011, you found a correlation 0.8882501, r-squared of 0.7889882, 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]]
Dem Votes in Kentucky and Everest Climbs: A Rhyming Correlation

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the surprising (and somewhat whimsical) relationship between the number of votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Kentucky and the total number of successful Mount Everest climbs. Drawing from data sources such as MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the CBC, our research team has identified a correlation coefficient of 0.8882501 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 1976 to 2011. Our findings present an intriguing connection between political preferences in the Bluegrass State and the Himalayan triumphs of intrepid climbers. The implications of our results are both comical and thought-provoking, shedding light on a correlation that is truly an "epic summit" in the realm of unexpected statistical relationships.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
Nestled amongst the rolling hills of Kentucky, where the horses run and the banjos twang, sits a mystery as enigmatic as the secret recipes of Colonel Sanders – the uncanny relationship between votes for the Democrat presidential candidate and the number of successful Mount Everest climbs. As a team of intrepid researchers, we set out to unravel this delightful enigma, armed with nothing but data and a healthy dose of skepticism.
It is not often that statistical correlations lead us to ponder the whimsical connections between political preferences and extreme mountaineering feats. However, as the old adage goes, "correlation does not imply causation, but it sure does make for a great conversation starter at cocktail parties." Armed with an unshakeable sense of curiosity and a dash of humor, we embarked on our statistical odyssey, journeying through the maze of data points and error bars towards the summit of knowledge.
Oh, statistics! The fickle and capricious mistress of the scientific world. Like a siren luring researchers into the treacherous waters of significance testing, the field of statistics has long been a source of both enlightenment and befuddlement. As we delved into the depths of voting records and Himalayan expeditions, we found ourselves dancing with p-values and correlation coefficients, like spelunkers navigating the caverns of uncertainty.
The aim of our endeavor is not merely to uncover a statistical relationship, but to unravel a tale of two seemingly disparate entities merging in a poetic dance of numbers. What could possibly connect the political leanings of Kentucky voters to the feats of conquering the world's highest peak? The answer may not be as elusive as the Yeti, but it certainly holds a charm that is equally tantalizing.
So, ladies and gentlemen, fasten your seatbelts and prepare for a statistical rollercoaster ride through the Bluegrass State and the roof of the world. Our findings are bound to be as intriguing as a Bigfoot sighting in the White House – improbable, yet undeniably captivating. Join us as we embark on this journey of discovery, where the lighthearted nature of our research belies the serious implications of unexpected statistical relationships.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The results of our investigation into the connection between votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Kentucky and the total number of successful Mount Everest climbs are a veritable Everest of intrigue. For the time period spanning from 1976 to 2011, we unearthed a correlation coefficient of 0.8882501, an r-squared value of 0.7889882, and a cheeky p-value of less than 0.01. It seems that the political landscape of the Bluegrass State has a rocky, yet symbiotic, relationship with the triumphs of mountaineers scaling the "roof of the world."

Like a pair of mismatched socks conspiring to brighten up a mundane Monday, the correlation between these two seemingly incongruous variables showcases a delightful harmony in our data. One might even say it's a statistical symphony in the key of "Rock"-y Mountains.

Our single figure (Fig. 1) captures the essence of this unexpected correlation, bringing to light a scatterplot that is as mesmerizing as a ghost story told around a campfire. The plot clearly illustrates the strong positive relationship between the votes for the Democrat candidate and the successful ascents of Everest, painting a picture as captivating as the Mona Lisa's smile - mysterious, yet undeniably compelling.

In conclusion, our findings not only highlight the statistical significance of this peculiar association but also serve as a reminder that the world of data analysis is a place of endless surprises. Just as the summit of Mount Everest beckons intrepid adventurers, our research beckons the curious minds to ponder the delightful randomness tucked away in the folds of statistical datasets. It's as if the gods of statistics were playing a whimsical game of celestial Twister, leaving us to untangle the colorful knots of correlation and causation.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Kentucky and Total Number of Successful Mount Everest Climbs. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

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]]
Dem Votes in Kentucky and Everest Climbs: A Rhyming Correlation

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the surprising (and somewhat whimsical) relationship between the number of votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Kentucky and the total number of successful Mount Everest climbs. Drawing from data sources such as MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the CBC, our research team has identified a correlation coefficient of 0.8882501 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 1976 to 2011. Our findings present an intriguing connection between political preferences in the Bluegrass State and the Himalayan triumphs of intrepid climbers. The implications of our results are both comical and thought-provoking, shedding light on a correlation that is truly an "epic summit" in the realm of unexpected statistical relationships.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The pursuit of understanding the curious correlation between the number of votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Kentucky and the total number of successful Mount Everest climbs has led scholars to delve into a plethora of diverse and at times perplexing literature. In "The Statistical Union of Politics and Climbing," Smith explores the historical evolution of political ideologies in Kentucky and the growing significance of Everest expeditions in the modern era. While the author takes a comprehensive approach to the subject matter, the study fails to capture the whimsical essence that characterizes this unique statistical relationship. In stark contrast, Doe's "A Climber’s Guide to Political Victory" offers an insightful exploration of the psychological motivations underlying political allegiances and mountaineering triumphs, yet stops short of investigating their correlation. Jones, in "Democratic Ascents: An Unexpected Connection," takes a lighthearted approach to the topic, weaving a narrative that blends election results with mountaineering anecdotes, but lacks the empirical rigor necessary for academic scrutiny.
As we venture deeper into the realm of literature, it is essential to acknowledge the non-fiction works that have contributed tangentially to our understanding of this peculiar correlation. For instance, "Into Thin Air" by Jon Krakauer presents a gripping firsthand account of an ill-fated Everest expedition, offering insights into the challenges and triumphs of high-altitude mountaineering. Similarly, "What Happened" by Hillary Rodham Clinton provides a firsthand perspective on the intersection of politics and personal adversity, inviting readers to contemplate the resilience required to surmount seemingly insurmountable challenges.
In the realm of fiction, works such as "The Summiteer's Dilemma" by Arthur Conan Doyle and "Political Peaks: A Tale of Votes and Valleys" by Agatha Christie have captivated readers with their imaginative blending of electoral drama and mountainous conquests. While these literary works may seem far removed from the realm of scholarly inquiry, they have served as a source of inspiration and creative juxtaposition for our exploration of the unexpected statistical links between politics and climbing.
In an unexpected twist, our research team also delved into the world of animated television shows and children's programs in pursuit of unconventional insights. "Dora the Explorer" and "Paw Patrol" may appear unrelated to our scholarly objectives, but their themes of perseverance, teamwork, and adventure have offered unexpected parallels to the tenacity and camaraderie exhibited in both political campaigns and mountaineering expeditions.
In closing, our literature review has laid the groundwork for a comprehensive understanding of the multifaceted dimensions of the connection between votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Kentucky and successful Mount Everest climbs. As we transition to the empirical findings and analysis, we invite readers to embrace the lighthearted spirit of our inquiry while acknowledging the serious implications of our revelatory conclusions.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our investigation into the connection between votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Kentucky and the total number of successful Mount Everest climbs are a veritable Everest of intrigue. For the time period spanning from 1976 to 2011, we unearthed a correlation coefficient of 0.8882501, an r-squared value of 0.7889882, and a cheeky p-value of less than 0.01. It seems that the political landscape of the Bluegrass State has a rocky, yet symbiotic, relationship with the triumphs of mountaineers scaling the "roof of the world."
Like a pair of mismatched socks conspiring to brighten up a mundane Monday, the correlation between these two seemingly incongruous variables showcases a delightful harmony in our data. One might even say it's a statistical symphony in the key of "Rock"-y Mountains.
Our single figure (Fig. 1) captures the essence of this unexpected correlation, bringing to light a scatterplot that is as mesmerizing as a ghost story told around a campfire. The plot clearly illustrates the strong positive relationship between the votes for the Democrat candidate and the successful ascents of Everest, painting a picture as captivating as the Mona Lisa's smile - mysterious, yet undeniably compelling.
In conclusion, our findings not only highlight the statistical significance of this peculiar association but also serve as a reminder that the world of data analysis is a place of endless surprises. Just as the summit of Mount Everest beckons intrepid adventurers, our research beckons the curious minds to ponder the delightful randomness tucked away in the folds of statistical datasets. It's as if the gods of statistics were playing a whimsical game of celestial Twister, leaving us to untangle the colorful knots of correlation and causation.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Our study has unraveled a correlation between two seemingly unrelated entities - the inclination toward the Democratic presidential candidate in the state of Kentucky and the victorious conquerors of Mount Everest. It appears that these variables, much like a pair of adventurous lovers, are entwined in a captivating dance of statistical significance.

Drawing on the comical yet illuminating insights from our literature review, we find a surprising alignment between our findings and the whimsy expounded by Jones in "Democratic Ascents: An Unexpected Connection." It is as though our data has donned a political climbing harness and embarked on a statistical ascent to the summit of empirical validation.

Our results echo the profound yet light-hearted sentiments conveyed by the inimitable Arthur Conan Doyle in "The Summiteer's Dilemma." Just as the characters in his story navigated the labyrinthine mental terrain of mountainous challenges, our data journeyed through the treacherous landscape of statistical relationships and emerged victorious, wielding a correlation coefficient as the emblem of its conquest.

Embracing the playful spirit of our quest, our research has yielded an Everest-worthy r-squared value, symbolizing the resilience and determinate nature of our correlation. It is as if our findings have donned the mantle of a stalwart mountaineer, weathering the storms of skepticism and scaling the peaks of statistical validation.

In essence, our investigation, much like a whimsical scientific expedition, has uncovered a correlation that stands as a testament to the marvels hidden beneath the veneer of data. It's a reminder that in the realm of statistical inquiry, the most improbable connections can unveil themselves as true bedfellows, just like a Democrat's votes in Kentucky and a climber's triumph on Everest - an odd but undeniable partnership, bound by the poetic laws of correlation.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Kentucky and Total Number of Successful Mount Everest Climbs. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

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]]
Dem Votes in Kentucky and Everest Climbs: A Rhyming Correlation

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the surprising (and somewhat whimsical) relationship between the number of votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Kentucky and the total number of successful Mount Everest climbs. Drawing from data sources such as MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the CBC, our research team has identified a correlation coefficient of 0.8882501 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 1976 to 2011. Our findings present an intriguing connection between political preferences in the Bluegrass State and the Himalayan triumphs of intrepid climbers. The implications of our results are both comical and thought-provoking, shedding light on a correlation that is truly an "epic summit" in the realm of unexpected statistical relationships.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
Nestled amongst the rolling hills of Kentucky, where the horses run and the banjos twang, sits a mystery as enigmatic as the secret recipes of Colonel Sanders – the uncanny relationship between votes for the Democrat presidential candidate and the number of successful Mount Everest climbs. As a team of intrepid researchers, we set out to unravel this delightful enigma, armed with nothing but data and a healthy dose of skepticism.
It is not often that statistical correlations lead us to ponder the whimsical connections between political preferences and extreme mountaineering feats. However, as the old adage goes, "correlation does not imply causation, but it sure does make for a great conversation starter at cocktail parties." Armed with an unshakeable sense of curiosity and a dash of humor, we embarked on our statistical odyssey, journeying through the maze of data points and error bars towards the summit of knowledge.
Oh, statistics! The fickle and capricious mistress of the scientific world. Like a siren luring researchers into the treacherous waters of significance testing, the field of statistics has long been a source of both enlightenment and befuddlement. As we delved into the depths of voting records and Himalayan expeditions, we found ourselves dancing with p-values and correlation coefficients, like spelunkers navigating the caverns of uncertainty.
The aim of our endeavor is not merely to uncover a statistical relationship, but to unravel a tale of two seemingly disparate entities merging in a poetic dance of numbers. What could possibly connect the political leanings of Kentucky voters to the feats of conquering the world's highest peak? The answer may not be as elusive as the Yeti, but it certainly holds a charm that is equally tantalizing.
So, ladies and gentlemen, fasten your seatbelts and prepare for a statistical rollercoaster ride through the Bluegrass State and the roof of the world. Our findings are bound to be as intriguing as a Bigfoot sighting in the White House – improbable, yet undeniably captivating. Join us as we embark on this journey of discovery, where the lighthearted nature of our research belies the serious implications of unexpected statistical relationships.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our investigation into the connection between votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Kentucky and the total number of successful Mount Everest climbs are a veritable Everest of intrigue. For the time period spanning from 1976 to 2011, we unearthed a correlation coefficient of 0.8882501, an r-squared value of 0.7889882, and a cheeky p-value of less than 0.01. It seems that the political landscape of the Bluegrass State has a rocky, yet symbiotic, relationship with the triumphs of mountaineers scaling the "roof of the world."
Like a pair of mismatched socks conspiring to brighten up a mundane Monday, the correlation between these two seemingly incongruous variables showcases a delightful harmony in our data. One might even say it's a statistical symphony in the key of "Rock"-y Mountains.
Our single figure (Fig. 1) captures the essence of this unexpected correlation, bringing to light a scatterplot that is as mesmerizing as a ghost story told around a campfire. The plot clearly illustrates the strong positive relationship between the votes for the Democrat candidate and the successful ascents of Everest, painting a picture as captivating as the Mona Lisa's smile - mysterious, yet undeniably compelling.
In conclusion, our findings not only highlight the statistical significance of this peculiar association but also serve as a reminder that the world of data analysis is a place of endless surprises. Just as the summit of Mount Everest beckons intrepid adventurers, our research beckons the curious minds to ponder the delightful randomness tucked away in the folds of statistical datasets. It's as if the gods of statistics were playing a whimsical game of celestial Twister, leaving us to untangle the colorful knots of correlation and causation.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

As we reach the "peak" of our statistical expedition, it's clear that our findings bring a whole new meaning to the phrase "election climber." The correlation between votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Kentucky and the total number of successful Mount Everest climbs seems to be as solid as a climber's grip on a rocky ledge.

Our results shine a light on the unexpected ways in which human behavior and achievements can intertwine, much like a pair of tangled earphones – oddly connected yet remarkably fascinating. Furthermore, the statistical significance of our correlation is as striking as a yeti sighting in a snowstorm – simply undeniable.

With an r-squared value that's tighter than a belay rope and a p-value smaller than a summit base camp, our research has shed light on a correlation that is truly an "epic summit" in the realm of unexpected statistical relationships.

In light of our findings, it's safe to say that no more research is needed in this area. The correlation is as clear as the view from the top of Mount Everest - and just as breathtaking! It seems that the winds of statistical fate have brought us to the summit of understanding, where the whimsy of our research only adds to the enchantment of this unexpected connection.


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 Dem Votes in Kentucky and Everest Climbs: A Rhyming Correlation. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Quirky Correlations


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 Dem Votes in Kentucky and Everest Climbs: A Rhyming Correlation. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Institute for Rhyming Correlations in Sociology and Mountaineering


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 Dem Votes in Kentucky and Everest Climbs: A Rhyming Correlation with an abstract of This paper delves into the surprising (and somewhat whimsical) relationship between the number of votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Kentucky and the total number of successful Mount Everest climbs. Drawing from data sources such as MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the CBC, our research team has identified a correlation coefficient of 0.8882501 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning from 1976 to 2011. Our findings present an intriguing connection between political preferences in the Bluegrass State and the Himalayan triumphs of intrepid climbers. The implications of our results are both comical and thought-provoking, shedding light on a correlation that is truly an "epic summit" in the realm of unexpected statistical relationships.

ChatGPT:

Democrat votes Kentucky, Everest climbs correlation, Mount Everest successful summit correlation, Democrat voting trends, Kentucky election data, Mount Everest expedition statistics, correlation coefficient, political preferences and mountain climbing, statistical relationships, unexpected correlations, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, CBC data sources

*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

Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Kentucky
Detailed data title: Total votes cast for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Kentucky
Source: MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse
See what else correlates with Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Kentucky

Total Number of Successful Mount Everest Climbs
Source: CBC
See what else correlates with Total Number of Successful Mount Everest Climbs

Correlation r = 0.8882501 (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 = 0.7889882 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 78.9% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Total Number of Successful Mount Everest Climbs) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Kentucky) over the 9 years from 1976 through 2011.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.0014. 0.0013748313875505537000000000
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 0.89 in 0.14% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 727 random variables Which I absolutely did.
with the same 8 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 8 because we have two variables measured over a period of 9 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.

[ 0.55, 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.
197619801984198819921996200020042008
Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Kentucky (Total votes)615717617417539539580368665104636614638923712733751985
Total Number of Successful Mount Everest Climbs (Climbers)41016509095145337423




Why this works

  1. Data dredging: I have 25,237 variables in my database. I compare all these variables against each other to find ones that randomly match up. That's 636,906,169 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. Very low n: There are not many data points included in this analysis. Even if the p-value is high, we should be suspicious of using so few datapoints in a correlation.
  5. Y-axis doesn't start at zero: I truncated the Y-axes of the graph above. I also used a line graph, which makes the visual connection stand out more than it deserves. Nothing against line graphs. They are great at telling a story when you have linear data! But visually it is deceptive because the only data is at the points on the graph, not the lines on the graph. In between each point, the data could have been doing anything. Like going for a random walk by itself!
    Mathematically what I showed is true, but it is intentionally misleading. Below is the same chart but with both Y-axes starting at zero.




Try it yourself

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

    return correlation, r_squared, p_value

# These are the arrays for the variables shown on this page, but you can modify them to be any two sets of numbers
array_1 = np.array([615717,617417,539539,580368,665104,636614,638923,712733,751985,])
array_2 = np.array([4,10,16,50,90,95,145,337,423,])
array_1_name = "Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Kentucky"
array_2_name = "Total Number of Successful Mount Everest Climbs"

# 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?

You're the rating guru we've been waiting for!


Correlation ID: 5508 · Black Variable ID: 25982 · Red Variable ID: 498
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0