Report an error
Average length of 'Be Smart' science YouTube videos correlates with...
| Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? | 
| Bachelor's degrees awarded in Transportation | r=0.98 | 9yrs | No | 
| The number of septic tank servicers and sewer pipe cleaners in Wisconsin | r=0.98 | 10yrs | No | 
| Electricity generation in Brazil | r=0.98 | 9yrs | No | 
| Annual US household spending on major appliances | r=0.97 | 10yrs | No | 
| Grocery store spend in Ohio | r=0.96 | 8yrs | No | 
| Master's degrees awarded in Psychology | r=0.96 | 9yrs | No | 
| Popularity of the first name Moshe | r=0.96 | 10yrs | Yes! | 
| Google searches for 'do vaccines work' | r=0.94 | 11yrs | No | 
| Bachelor's degrees awarded in Psychology | r=0.9 | 9yrs | No | 
| The number of private detectives in Ohio | r=0.82 | 10yrs | No | 
Average length of 'Be Smart' science YouTube videos also correlates with...
<< Back to discover a correlation
You caught me! While it would be intuitive to sort only by "correlation," I have a big, weird database. If I sort only by correlation, often all the top results are from some one or two very large datasets (like the weather or labor statistics), and it overwhelms the page.
I can't show you *all* the correlations, because my database would get too large and this page would take a very long time to load. Instead I opt to show you a subset, and I sort them by a magic system score. It starts with the correlation, but penalizes variables that repeat from the same dataset. (It also gives a bonus to variables I happen to find interesting.)
