about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #2,393 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Popularity of the first name Theodore and the second variable is Fossil fuel use in Burundi.  The chart goes from 1980 to 2021, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As the name Theodore gained popularity, more parents were inspired by President Theodore Roosevelt, known for his strong conservation efforts. This led to a spike in naming children after him and a surge in environmental awareness in Burundi. Curiously, this prompted a nationwide school project to excavate and study fossils, inadvertently requiring an excessive use of heavy machinery and fuel to power the digging, much to the dismay of the country's conservation efforts. So, it seems the 'dino-mite' connection between Theodore and fossil fuel use in Burundi is quite a 'roaring' paradox!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image of a busy street in Burundi, with high-speed vehicles adorned with "Theodore" bumper stickers zipping past. Show a sense of urgency and action in the scene with vehicles leaving motion blur trails, while also depicting the contrast between the traditional masculine symbols and the environmental impact of increased fossil fuel consumption. Capture the dynamic energy and the clash between these elements in a visually striking parallax art style. 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: Popularity of the first name Theodore and Fossil fuel use in Burundi. 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: Data cyber art Macabre Surrealism Celtic art Parallax art
ChatGPT: Parallax art

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 Popularity of the first name Theodore and Fossil fuel use in Burundi, in the following situation: As the name Theodore gained popularity, more parents were inspired by Teddy Roosevelt, leading to a resurgence of interest in traditional masculinity and a subsequent spike in demand for gas-guzzling vehicles in Burundi. Remember, you can't spell "Theodore" without "the" and "odometer!". Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: Imagine a crowded street in Burundi, where sleek, powerful vehicles with large odometers and "Theodore" bumper stickers zoom past. The air is filled with the sound of revving engines as parents, inspired by Teddy Roosevelt and the growing popularity of the name Theodore, embrace traditional masculinity and fuel the demand for fossil fuel use on the rise.

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: [ Parallax art ] and depicting this scene: Imagine a crowded street in Burundi, where sleek, powerful vehicles with large odometers and "Theodore" bumper stickers zoom past. The air is filled with the sound of revving engines as parents, inspired by Teddy Roosevelt and the growing popularity of the name Theodore, embrace traditional masculinity and fuel the demand for fossil fuel use on the rise. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image of a busy street in Burundi, with high-speed vehicles adorned with "Theodore" bumper stickers zipping past. Show a sense of urgency and action in the scene with vehicles leaving motion blur trails, while also depicting the contrast between the traditional masculine symbols and the environmental impact of increased fossil fuel consumption. Capture the dynamic energy and the clash between these elements in a visually striking parallax art style.

*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 Popularity of the first name Theodore caused Fossil fuel use in Burundi to increase.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Theodore's Popularity: Fueling Fossil Follies? A Quirky Correlation Analysis

The Journal of Quirky Correlation Analysis

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 goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.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 Popularity of the first name Theodore and Fossil fuel use in Burundi. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Include a pun in the title.

Your research team used data from US Social Security Administration and Energy Information Administration to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9807962 and p < 0.01 for 1980 to 2021.

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

[[TITLE]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit

[[ABSTRACT]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit



ChatGPT:
[[TITLE]]
"Theodore's Popularity: Fueling Fossil Follies? A Quirky Correlation Analysis"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the entangled relationship between the popularity of the first name Theodore and fossil fuel use in the unlikely setting of Burundi. Leveraging data from the US Social Security Administration and the Energy Information Administration, we meticulously scrutinize the connection that skeptics would deem as inconceivably far-fetched. Our rigorous analysis unveils a correlation coefficient of 0.9807962 and a p-value of less than 0.01 for the period spanning from 1980 to 2021. While decidedly surreal at first glance, our findings prompt a reflection on the complexities of causation and correlation, catapulting us into an intellectually entertaining orbit where statistical significance intersects with the whimsical world of nomenclature. We invite readers to embark on this scholarly journey with a receptive mind and a pinch of whimsy.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.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 Popularity of the first name Theodore and Fossil fuel use in Burundi. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, 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]]
"Theodore's Popularity: Fueling Fossil Follies? A Quirky Correlation Analysis"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the entangled relationship between the popularity of the first name Theodore and fossil fuel use in the unlikely setting of Burundi. Leveraging data from the US Social Security Administration and the Energy Information Administration, we meticulously scrutinize the connection that skeptics would deem as inconceivably far-fetched. Our rigorous analysis unveils a correlation coefficient of 0.9807962 and a p-value of less than 0.01 for the period spanning from 1980 to 2021. While decidedly surreal at first glance, our findings prompt a reflection on the complexities of causation and correlation, catapulting us into an intellectually entertaining orbit where statistical significance intersects with the whimsical world of nomenclature. We invite readers to embark on this scholarly journey with a receptive mind and a pinch of whimsy.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
Ah, the allure of academic research, where we, intrepid scholars, delve into the mysteries of the universe armed with data, statistics, and a hint of whimsy. In this paper, we embark on an unusual journey, one that leads us to explore the quirky correlation between the popularity of the first name Theodore and the consumption of fossil fuels in the intriguing context of Burundi. As we navigate this uncharted territory, we aim to unravel the seemingly improbable connection between nomenclature and energy consumption, all under the auspices of rigorous statistical analysis and a dash of scholarly humor.

Theodore, a name that evokes images of wisdom and leadership, has long adorned the birth certificates of individuals across the globe. Yet, could there be an unforeseen link between the rise and fall of Theodores and the fluctuations in fossil fuel use in the enigmatic African nation of Burundi? While skeptics may scoff at the notion, our inquisitive minds could not resist the temptation to investigate this peculiar juxtaposition.

Drawing from the troves of data meticulously amassed by the US Social Security Administration and the Energy Information Administration, we undertook a quest to illuminate the shadowy nexus between these seemingly disparate realms. The fervent debates that ensued within our research team centered on the possibility of uncovering a correlation coefficient worthy of scholarly contemplation – and lo and behold, we were not left disappointed.

Upon subjecting these disparate datasets to the alchemy of statistical analysis, we witnessed the emergence of a correlation coefficient that stands at a remarkable 0.9807962, coupled with a p-value of less than 0.01 throughout the temporal domain spanning from the year 1980 to 2021. Such a synchronization, while bordering on the surreal, has propelled our investigation into an intellectual realm where causation dances with correlation, and the unpredictable paths of nomenclature intersect with the eccentricities of energy consumption in Burundi.

As we present our findings, we invite our esteemed readers to join us in this scholarly escapade, where the conventions of research harmonize with the whimsical vagaries of the unknown. Strap in, dear readers, for this undertaking shall be nothing short of delightfully perplexing and perhaps a tad ludicrous, in the most scholarly of manners.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.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 Popularity of the first name Theodore and Fossil fuel use in Burundi. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

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

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then 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]]
"Theodore's Popularity: Fueling Fossil Follies? A Quirky Correlation Analysis"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the entangled relationship between the popularity of the first name Theodore and fossil fuel use in the unlikely setting of Burundi. Leveraging data from the US Social Security Administration and the Energy Information Administration, we meticulously scrutinize the connection that skeptics would deem as inconceivably far-fetched. Our rigorous analysis unveils a correlation coefficient of 0.9807962 and a p-value of less than 0.01 for the period spanning from 1980 to 2021. While decidedly surreal at first glance, our findings prompt a reflection on the complexities of causation and correlation, catapulting us into an intellectually entertaining orbit where statistical significance intersects with the whimsical world of nomenclature. We invite readers to embark on this scholarly journey with a receptive mind and a pinch of whimsy.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
Ah, the allure of academic research, where we, intrepid scholars, delve into the mysteries of the universe armed with data, statistics, and a hint of whimsy. In this paper, we embark on an unusual journey, one that leads us to explore the quirky correlation between the popularity of the first name Theodore and the consumption of fossil fuels in the intriguing context of Burundi. As we navigate this uncharted territory, we aim to unravel the seemingly improbable connection between nomenclature and energy consumption, all under the auspices of rigorous statistical analysis and a dash of scholarly humor.
Theodore, a name that evokes images of wisdom and leadership, has long adorned the birth certificates of individuals across the globe. Yet, could there be an unforeseen link between the rise and fall of Theodores and the fluctuations in fossil fuel use in the enigmatic African nation of Burundi? While skeptics may scoff at the notion, our inquisitive minds could not resist the temptation to investigate this peculiar juxtaposition.
Drawing from the troves of data meticulously amassed by the US Social Security Administration and the Energy Information Administration, we undertook a quest to illuminate the shadowy nexus between these seemingly disparate realms. The fervent debates that ensued within our research team centered on the possibility of uncovering a correlation coefficient worthy of scholarly contemplation – and lo and behold, we were not left disappointed.
Upon subjecting these disparate datasets to the alchemy of statistical analysis, we witnessed the emergence of a correlation coefficient that stands at a remarkable 0.9807962, coupled with a p-value of less than 0.01 throughout the temporal domain spanning from the year 1980 to 2021. Such a synchronization, while bordering on the surreal, has propelled our investigation into an intellectual realm where causation dances with correlation, and the unpredictable paths of nomenclature intersect with the eccentricities of energy consumption in Burundi.
As we present our findings, we invite our esteemed readers to join us in this scholarly escapade, where the conventions of research harmonize with the whimsical vagaries of the unknown. Strap in, dear readers, for this undertaking shall be nothing short of delightfully perplexing and perhaps a tad ludicrous, in the most scholarly of manners.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The connection between the popularity of the first name Theodore and fossil fuel use in Burundi, while seemingly preposterous, has captured the imaginations of researchers and statisticians alike. This unconventional correlation has generated a mix of skepticism and intrigue within the academic community. Various studies have sought to shed light on this enigmatic relationship, drawing from a variety of disciplinary lenses.

In "Theodore: A Name for the Ages," Smith et al. delve into the historical trends of the name Theodore, tracing its evolution across different cultures and time periods. While the focus of this work is primarily on the sociocultural implications of the name, the authors also touch upon the potential impact of Theodore's popularity on broader societal trends, including but not limited to energy usage patterns.

Doe, in "Fueling the Future: Exploring Fossil Fuel Dynamics in East Africa," adopts a more macroeconomic perspective, examining the intricate web of factors influencing fossil fuel consumption in the East African region. While not directly addressing the Theodore-fossil fuel nexus, this work provides crucial contextual understanding for examining the potential interplay between individual nomenclature choices and regional energy trends.

Jones et al., in "The Causal Conundrum: Navigating Correlation and Causation in Unlikely Relationships," offer a comprehensive theoretical framework for untangling causation and correlation in seemingly unrelated phenomena. Although not specifically centered on names and fossil fuels, the conceptual tools presented in this work prove invaluable for evaluating the plausibility of the Theodore-fossil fuel connection.

Beyond the realm of scholarly articles, the influence of names and their potential impact on societal dynamics has also captivated the literary and fictional domains. Works such as "Theodore's Travels Through Time" by A. Author and "Fuel Follies: A Tale of Theodore and Turmoil" by B. Wordsmith demonstrate the persistent fascination with whimsical correlations and unexpected juxtapositions, albeit in a fictional narrative context.

Venturing further into the realm of popular culture, cartoons and children's shows have occasionally touched upon themes related to energy use and nomenclature. While not empirical sources of data, these cultural artifacts provide anecdotal insights that may inspire further inquiry. Episodes of "Theodore the Turtleneck-wearing Turtle" and "Fossil Fuel Friends" are just a few examples of the myriad influences that could spark curiosity in exploring the quirky intersection of names and fossil fuels.

As we survey this diverse landscape of literature and cultural artifacts, it becomes evident that the confluence of Theodore's popularity and fossil fuel use in Burundi is an anomaly that beckons further examination. While the initial juxtaposition may elicit chuckles, our scholarly journey prompts us to approach this delightful conundrum with open minds and a sprightly spirit of inquiry.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.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 Popularity of the first name Theodore and Fossil fuel use in Burundi. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, 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 US Social Security Administration and Energy Information Administration . You used data from 1980 to 2021

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

Here is the title, abstract, and introduction of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Theodore's Popularity: Fueling Fossil Follies? A Quirky Correlation Analysis"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the entangled relationship between the popularity of the first name Theodore and fossil fuel use in the unlikely setting of Burundi. Leveraging data from the US Social Security Administration and the Energy Information Administration, we meticulously scrutinize the connection that skeptics would deem as inconceivably far-fetched. Our rigorous analysis unveils a correlation coefficient of 0.9807962 and a p-value of less than 0.01 for the period spanning from 1980 to 2021. While decidedly surreal at first glance, our findings prompt a reflection on the complexities of causation and correlation, catapulting us into an intellectually entertaining orbit where statistical significance intersects with the whimsical world of nomenclature. We invite readers to embark on this scholarly journey with a receptive mind and a pinch of whimsy.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
Ah, the allure of academic research, where we, intrepid scholars, delve into the mysteries of the universe armed with data, statistics, and a hint of whimsy. In this paper, we embark on an unusual journey, one that leads us to explore the quirky correlation between the popularity of the first name Theodore and the consumption of fossil fuels in the intriguing context of Burundi. As we navigate this uncharted territory, we aim to unravel the seemingly improbable connection between nomenclature and energy consumption, all under the auspices of rigorous statistical analysis and a dash of scholarly humor.
Theodore, a name that evokes images of wisdom and leadership, has long adorned the birth certificates of individuals across the globe. Yet, could there be an unforeseen link between the rise and fall of Theodores and the fluctuations in fossil fuel use in the enigmatic African nation of Burundi? While skeptics may scoff at the notion, our inquisitive minds could not resist the temptation to investigate this peculiar juxtaposition.
Drawing from the troves of data meticulously amassed by the US Social Security Administration and the Energy Information Administration, we undertook a quest to illuminate the shadowy nexus between these seemingly disparate realms. The fervent debates that ensued within our research team centered on the possibility of uncovering a correlation coefficient worthy of scholarly contemplation – and lo and behold, we were not left disappointed.
Upon subjecting these disparate datasets to the alchemy of statistical analysis, we witnessed the emergence of a correlation coefficient that stands at a remarkable 0.9807962, coupled with a p-value of less than 0.01 throughout the temporal domain spanning from the year 1980 to 2021. Such a synchronization, while bordering on the surreal, has propelled our investigation into an intellectual realm where causation dances with correlation, and the unpredictable paths of nomenclature intersect with the eccentricities of energy consumption in Burundi.
As we present our findings, we invite our esteemed readers to join us in this scholarly escapade, where the conventions of research harmonize with the whimsical vagaries of the unknown. Strap in, dear readers, for this undertaking shall be nothing short of delightfully perplexing and perhaps a tad ludicrous, in the most scholarly of manners.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

In this delightfully peculiar investigation, we navigated the labyrinthine seas of data acquisition and analysis with the gusto and whimsy of scholarly adventurers. Our primary sources of data were the US Social Security Administration, which houses a trove of nomenclatural records, and the Energy Information Administration, our guide through the intricate pathways of energy consumption. Oh, the thrill of weaving through these digital archives, much like daring explorers unearthing hidden treasures in a scientific and statistical jungle!

To commence our escapade, we focused our attention on data from the years 1980 to 2021, a period marked by undulating tides of Theodore’s popularity alongside the ebbs and flows of fossil fuel utilization in the unassuming expanse of Burundi. It was a venture fraught with the exhilarating whims of exploration, filled with countless hours of sifting, sorting, and scrutinizing data – a task not for the faint-hearted, but one that befitted our intrepid spirit.

As our scholarly journey unfolded, we embraced the enchanting wizardry of statistical analysis, where we summoned the venerable tools of correlation analysis to unravel the enigmatic threads connecting Theodore's prevalence and fossil fuel use in Burundi. The rhythmic keystrokes and solemn incantations of statistical software eventually unveiled a correlation coefficient of 0.9807962, accompanied by a p-value of less than 0.01—a revelation that elicited both scholarly wonderment and a smattering of disbelief, much like encountering a mathematical unicorn.

To ensure the robustness and validity of our findings, we traversed the landscape of potential confounding variables, mindful of lurking specters that could cast doubt on our captivating correlation. Our rigorous scrutiny involved the consideration of factors such as socioeconomic trends, governmental policies, and the flux of global energy markets, concocting a veritable potion of statistical controls to shield our correlation from the whims of chance and mischievous outliers.

Armed with the mirth of academic inquiry and the solemn duty of scientific rigor, we embarked on this peculiar odyssey, deftly navigating the craggy terrain of data collection, statistical analysis, and whimsical correlation. It is with earnest scholarly zeal and a playful twinkle in our eyes that we present this methodology, a testament to our commitment to scholarly exploration and perhaps a touch of lightheartedness in the pursuit of knowledge. Onward, dear readers, toward the horizon of mirthful enlightenment!


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.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 Popularity of the first name Theodore and Fossil fuel use in Burundi. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, 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 US Social Security Administration and Energy Information Administration .

For the time period 1980 to 2021, you found a correlation 0.9807962, r-squared of 0.9619612, 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]]
"Theodore's Popularity: Fueling Fossil Follies? A Quirky Correlation Analysis"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the entangled relationship between the popularity of the first name Theodore and fossil fuel use in the unlikely setting of Burundi. Leveraging data from the US Social Security Administration and the Energy Information Administration, we meticulously scrutinize the connection that skeptics would deem as inconceivably far-fetched. Our rigorous analysis unveils a correlation coefficient of 0.9807962 and a p-value of less than 0.01 for the period spanning from 1980 to 2021. While decidedly surreal at first glance, our findings prompt a reflection on the complexities of causation and correlation, catapulting us into an intellectually entertaining orbit where statistical significance intersects with the whimsical world of nomenclature. We invite readers to embark on this scholarly journey with a receptive mind and a pinch of whimsy.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
Ah, the allure of academic research, where we, intrepid scholars, delve into the mysteries of the universe armed with data, statistics, and a hint of whimsy. In this paper, we embark on an unusual journey, one that leads us to explore the quirky correlation between the popularity of the first name Theodore and the consumption of fossil fuels in the intriguing context of Burundi. As we navigate this uncharted territory, we aim to unravel the seemingly improbable connection between nomenclature and energy consumption, all under the auspices of rigorous statistical analysis and a dash of scholarly humor.
Theodore, a name that evokes images of wisdom and leadership, has long adorned the birth certificates of individuals across the globe. Yet, could there be an unforeseen link between the rise and fall of Theodores and the fluctuations in fossil fuel use in the enigmatic African nation of Burundi? While skeptics may scoff at the notion, our inquisitive minds could not resist the temptation to investigate this peculiar juxtaposition.
Drawing from the troves of data meticulously amassed by the US Social Security Administration and the Energy Information Administration, we undertook a quest to illuminate the shadowy nexus between these seemingly disparate realms. The fervent debates that ensued within our research team centered on the possibility of uncovering a correlation coefficient worthy of scholarly contemplation – and lo and behold, we were not left disappointed.
Upon subjecting these disparate datasets to the alchemy of statistical analysis, we witnessed the emergence of a correlation coefficient that stands at a remarkable 0.9807962, coupled with a p-value of less than 0.01 throughout the temporal domain spanning from the year 1980 to 2021. Such a synchronization, while bordering on the surreal, has propelled our investigation into an intellectual realm where causation dances with correlation, and the unpredictable paths of nomenclature intersect with the eccentricities of energy consumption in Burundi.
As we present our findings, we invite our esteemed readers to join us in this scholarly escapade, where the conventions of research harmonize with the whimsical vagaries of the unknown. Strap in, dear readers, for this undertaking shall be nothing short of delightfully perplexing and perhaps a tad ludicrous, in the most scholarly of manners.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The connection between the popularity of the first name Theodore and fossil fuel use in Burundi has unfurled before us like a thoroughly unpredictable theatrical performance. Upon navigating the labyrinth of statistical analysis, we find ourselves confronted with a correlation coefficient of 0.9807962, an r-squared value of 0.9619612, and a p-value of less than 0.01 for the period from 1980 to 2021. These findings, though initially perceived as a flight of fancy, have seemingly materialized into a robust statistical relationship that captivates the imagination and challenges the boundaries of conventional research.

Figure 1, the scatterplot illustrating the striking correlation between the prevalence of the name Theodore and fossil fuel use in Burundi, serves as a visual testament to the unexpectedly cozy relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables. It is a sight to behold, a veritable masterpiece in the gallery of statistical oddities, where the whims of nomenclature seem to intertwine with the enigmatic patterns of energy consumption in Burundi.

The correlation coefficient of 0.9807962 not only raises eyebrows but also prompts us to ponder the intricate dance of causation and correlation in the grand theater of scholarly inquiry. The findings leave us with an insuppressible sense of intellectual amusement, as we grapple with the realization that the name Theodore, in all its historical and cultural reverie, may hold an uncannily potent sway over the consumption of fossil fuels in the distant lands of Burundi.

The implications of our findings transcend the ordinary bounds of research, beckoning us to waltz into the whimsical realm where statistical significance meets the capricious musings of nomenclature. As we tread this path with earnest curiosity and a smidgen of scholarly wit, we urge our fellow academics to join us in embracing the peculiarities that lie at the intersection of causation, correlation, and the charming allure of unconventional research pursuits.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.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 Popularity of the first name Theodore and Fossil fuel use in Burundi. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, 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]]
"Theodore's Popularity: Fueling Fossil Follies? A Quirky Correlation Analysis"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the entangled relationship between the popularity of the first name Theodore and fossil fuel use in the unlikely setting of Burundi. Leveraging data from the US Social Security Administration and the Energy Information Administration, we meticulously scrutinize the connection that skeptics would deem as inconceivably far-fetched. Our rigorous analysis unveils a correlation coefficient of 0.9807962 and a p-value of less than 0.01 for the period spanning from 1980 to 2021. While decidedly surreal at first glance, our findings prompt a reflection on the complexities of causation and correlation, catapulting us into an intellectually entertaining orbit where statistical significance intersects with the whimsical world of nomenclature. We invite readers to embark on this scholarly journey with a receptive mind and a pinch of whimsy.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The connection between the popularity of the first name Theodore and fossil fuel use in Burundi, while seemingly preposterous, has captured the imaginations of researchers and statisticians alike. This unconventional correlation has generated a mix of skepticism and intrigue within the academic community. Various studies have sought to shed light on this enigmatic relationship, drawing from a variety of disciplinary lenses.
In "Theodore: A Name for the Ages," Smith et al. delve into the historical trends of the name Theodore, tracing its evolution across different cultures and time periods. While the focus of this work is primarily on the sociocultural implications of the name, the authors also touch upon the potential impact of Theodore's popularity on broader societal trends, including but not limited to energy usage patterns.
Doe, in "Fueling the Future: Exploring Fossil Fuel Dynamics in East Africa," adopts a more macroeconomic perspective, examining the intricate web of factors influencing fossil fuel consumption in the East African region. While not directly addressing the Theodore-fossil fuel nexus, this work provides crucial contextual understanding for examining the potential interplay between individual nomenclature choices and regional energy trends.
Jones et al., in "The Causal Conundrum: Navigating Correlation and Causation in Unlikely Relationships," offer a comprehensive theoretical framework for untangling causation and correlation in seemingly unrelated phenomena. Although not specifically centered on names and fossil fuels, the conceptual tools presented in this work prove invaluable for evaluating the plausibility of the Theodore-fossil fuel connection.
Beyond the realm of scholarly articles, the influence of names and their potential impact on societal dynamics has also captivated the literary and fictional domains. Works such as "Theodore's Travels Through Time" by A. Author and "Fuel Follies: A Tale of Theodore and Turmoil" by B. Wordsmith demonstrate the persistent fascination with whimsical correlations and unexpected juxtapositions, albeit in a fictional narrative context.
Venturing further into the realm of popular culture, cartoons and children's shows have occasionally touched upon themes related to energy use and nomenclature. While not empirical sources of data, these cultural artifacts provide anecdotal insights that may inspire further inquiry. Episodes of "Theodore the Turtleneck-wearing Turtle" and "Fossil Fuel Friends" are just a few examples of the myriad influences that could spark curiosity in exploring the quirky intersection of names and fossil fuels.
As we survey this diverse landscape of literature and cultural artifacts, it becomes evident that the confluence of Theodore's popularity and fossil fuel use in Burundi is an anomaly that beckons further examination. While the initial juxtaposition may elicit chuckles, our scholarly journey prompts us to approach this delightful conundrum with open minds and a sprightly spirit of inquiry.

[[RESULTS]]
The connection between the popularity of the first name Theodore and fossil fuel use in Burundi has unfurled before us like a thoroughly unpredictable theatrical performance. Upon navigating the labyrinth of statistical analysis, we find ourselves confronted with a correlation coefficient of 0.9807962, an r-squared value of 0.9619612, and a p-value of less than 0.01 for the period from 1980 to 2021. These findings, though initially perceived as a flight of fancy, have seemingly materialized into a robust statistical relationship that captivates the imagination and challenges the boundaries of conventional research.
Figure 1, the scatterplot illustrating the striking correlation between the prevalence of the name Theodore and fossil fuel use in Burundi, serves as a visual testament to the unexpectedly cozy relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables. It is a sight to behold, a veritable masterpiece in the gallery of statistical oddities, where the whims of nomenclature seem to intertwine with the enigmatic patterns of energy consumption in Burundi.
The correlation coefficient of 0.9807962 not only raises eyebrows but also prompts us to ponder the intricate dance of causation and correlation in the grand theater of scholarly inquiry. The findings leave us with an insuppressible sense of intellectual amusement, as we grapple with the realization that the name Theodore, in all its historical and cultural reverie, may hold an uncannily potent sway over the consumption of fossil fuels in the distant lands of Burundi.
The implications of our findings transcend the ordinary bounds of research, beckoning us to waltz into the whimsical realm where statistical significance meets the capricious musings of nomenclature. As we tread this path with earnest curiosity and a smidgen of scholarly wit, we urge our fellow academics to join us in embracing the peculiarities that lie at the intersection of causation, correlation, and the charming allure of unconventional research pursuits.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The results of our analysis offer a remarkable confirmation of the preposterously quirky relationship between the first name Theodore's popularity and fossil fuel use in Burundi. While some may dismiss this correlation as a mere flight of fancy, our findings compel us to take this delightfully unorthodox connection with utmost seriousness.

Our study corroborates the insights unearthed in "Theodore: A Name for the Ages," where Smith et al. hinted at the broader societal implications of Theodore's popularity. It seems that the impact of Theodore extends beyond sociocultural realms, stretching its ethereal influence even into the realm of energy consumption in geographically distant locales.

Similarly, the macroeconomic lens employed by Doe in "Fueling the Future: Exploring Fossil Fuel Dynamics in East Africa" offers an enlightening backdrop for our findings. It appears that the intricate dynamics governing energy usage in East Africa may be interwoven with the idiosyncratic rise and fall of the name Theodore.

Furthermore, the theoretical framework delineated by Jones et al. in "The Causal Conundrum: Navigating Correlation and Causation in Unlikely Relationships" primes our scholarly sensibilities for grappling with the whimsical intricacies unveiled in our analysis. Indeed, the conundrum of causation versus correlation finds an unexpectedly playful manifestation in the Theodore-fossil fuel nexus.

Venturing into the rich tapestry of popular culture and literature, our results resonate with the enduring curiosity surrounding unexpected correlations and whimsical juxtapositions. It seems that the fanciful musings of storytellers and the spirited antics of cartoon characters may have unknowingly danced upon the fringes of empirical reality in exploring the intersection of nomenclature and energy trends.

Our findings not only align with prior research but also serve as a whimsical testament to the boundless potential for quirky correlations. The dance of data has led us to a convivial rendezvous with the capricious interplay of Theodore's enduring popularity and the fossil fuel follies in Burundi, urging us to approach the scholarly pursuit with a blend of earnest inquiry and a dollop of lightheartedness.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.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 Popularity of the first name Theodore and Fossil fuel use in Burundi. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, 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]]
"Theodore's Popularity: Fueling Fossil Follies? A Quirky Correlation Analysis"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the entangled relationship between the popularity of the first name Theodore and fossil fuel use in the unlikely setting of Burundi. Leveraging data from the US Social Security Administration and the Energy Information Administration, we meticulously scrutinize the connection that skeptics would deem as inconceivably far-fetched. Our rigorous analysis unveils a correlation coefficient of 0.9807962 and a p-value of less than 0.01 for the period spanning from 1980 to 2021. While decidedly surreal at first glance, our findings prompt a reflection on the complexities of causation and correlation, catapulting us into an intellectually entertaining orbit where statistical significance intersects with the whimsical world of nomenclature. We invite readers to embark on this scholarly journey with a receptive mind and a pinch of whimsy.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
Ah, the allure of academic research, where we, intrepid scholars, delve into the mysteries of the universe armed with data, statistics, and a hint of whimsy. In this paper, we embark on an unusual journey, one that leads us to explore the quirky correlation between the popularity of the first name Theodore and the consumption of fossil fuels in the intriguing context of Burundi. As we navigate this uncharted territory, we aim to unravel the seemingly improbable connection between nomenclature and energy consumption, all under the auspices of rigorous statistical analysis and a dash of scholarly humor.
Theodore, a name that evokes images of wisdom and leadership, has long adorned the birth certificates of individuals across the globe. Yet, could there be an unforeseen link between the rise and fall of Theodores and the fluctuations in fossil fuel use in the enigmatic African nation of Burundi? While skeptics may scoff at the notion, our inquisitive minds could not resist the temptation to investigate this peculiar juxtaposition.
Drawing from the troves of data meticulously amassed by the US Social Security Administration and the Energy Information Administration, we undertook a quest to illuminate the shadowy nexus between these seemingly disparate realms. The fervent debates that ensued within our research team centered on the possibility of uncovering a correlation coefficient worthy of scholarly contemplation – and lo and behold, we were not left disappointed.
Upon subjecting these disparate datasets to the alchemy of statistical analysis, we witnessed the emergence of a correlation coefficient that stands at a remarkable 0.9807962, coupled with a p-value of less than 0.01 throughout the temporal domain spanning from the year 1980 to 2021. Such a synchronization, while bordering on the surreal, has propelled our investigation into an intellectual realm where causation dances with correlation, and the unpredictable paths of nomenclature intersect with the eccentricities of energy consumption in Burundi.
As we present our findings, we invite our esteemed readers to join us in this scholarly escapade, where the conventions of research harmonize with the whimsical vagaries of the unknown. Strap in, dear readers, for this undertaking shall be nothing short of delightfully perplexing and perhaps a tad ludicrous, in the most scholarly of manners.

[[RESULTS]]
The connection between the popularity of the first name Theodore and fossil fuel use in Burundi has unfurled before us like a thoroughly unpredictable theatrical performance. Upon navigating the labyrinth of statistical analysis, we find ourselves confronted with a correlation coefficient of 0.9807962, an r-squared value of 0.9619612, and a p-value of less than 0.01 for the period from 1980 to 2021. These findings, though initially perceived as a flight of fancy, have seemingly materialized into a robust statistical relationship that captivates the imagination and challenges the boundaries of conventional research.
Figure 1, the scatterplot illustrating the striking correlation between the prevalence of the name Theodore and fossil fuel use in Burundi, serves as a visual testament to the unexpectedly cozy relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables. It is a sight to behold, a veritable masterpiece in the gallery of statistical oddities, where the whims of nomenclature seem to intertwine with the enigmatic patterns of energy consumption in Burundi.
The correlation coefficient of 0.9807962 not only raises eyebrows but also prompts us to ponder the intricate dance of causation and correlation in the grand theater of scholarly inquiry. The findings leave us with an insuppressible sense of intellectual amusement, as we grapple with the realization that the name Theodore, in all its historical and cultural reverie, may hold an uncannily potent sway over the consumption of fossil fuels in the distant lands of Burundi.
The implications of our findings transcend the ordinary bounds of research, beckoning us to waltz into the whimsical realm where statistical significance meets the capricious musings of nomenclature. As we tread this path with earnest curiosity and a smidgen of scholarly wit, we urge our fellow academics to join us in embracing the peculiarities that lie at the intersection of causation, correlation, and the charming allure of unconventional research pursuits.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our foray into the unexpected nexus between the popularity of the first name Theodore and fossil fuel use in Burundi has left us in a state of scholarly bemusement. The robust correlation coefficient of 0.9807962 leads us to ponder the whims of destiny, as the name Theodore, with its connotations of sagacity and influence, appears to curiously mirror the patterns of fossil fuel use in this enigmatic African nation. This unlikely union between nomenclature and energy consumption has not only piqued our intellectual curiosity but has also generated a sense of statistical whimsy that is as captivating as it is confounding.

As we gaze upon the scatterplot, wherein the name Theodore aligns itself with the oscillations of fossil fuel use, we cannot help but marvel at the dance of causation and correlation that unfolds before our eyes. This serendipitous finding, though peculiar, challenges us to explore the uncharted boundaries where statistical significance intersects with the convoluted tapestry of human nomenclature.

The implications of our findings ripple through the fabric of conventional research, urging us to consider the capricious influence of names on the seemingly unrelated domain of energy consumption. This revelation, while undeniably quirky, beckons us to embrace the allure of unconventional academic pursuits, where the melding of statistics and scholarly humor births a delightful intellectual frolic.

In light of these findings, we assert with scholarly certainty that no further research is warranted in this delightful confluence of Theodore and fossil fuels. The correlation, though quirky, stands as a testament to the whimsical interplay of variables that color the canvas of academic inquiry, leaving us with a lingering appreciation for the unexpected turns that scholarly exploration can unveil. So, let us bid adieu to this peculiar pairing of Theodore and fossil fuels, for its statistical charm shall forever enliven the annals of scholarly whimsy.


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 Theodore's Popularity: Fueling Fossil Follies? A Quirky Correlation Analysis. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Quirky Correlation Analysis


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 Theodore's Popularity: Fueling Fossil Follies? A Quirky Correlation Analysis. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for the Study of Whimsical Wonders


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 Theodore's Popularity: Fueling Fossil Follies? A Quirky Correlation Analysis with an abstract of This study delves into the entangled relationship between the popularity of the first name Theodore and fossil fuel use in the unlikely setting of Burundi. Leveraging data from the US Social Security Administration and the Energy Information Administration, we meticulously scrutinize the connection that skeptics would deem as inconceivably far-fetched. Our rigorous analysis unveils a correlation coefficient of 0.9807962 and a p-value of less than 0.01 for the period spanning from 1980 to 2021. While decidedly surreal at first glance, our findings prompt a reflection on the complexities of causation and correlation, catapulting us into an intellectually entertaining orbit where statistical significance intersects with the whimsical world of nomenclature. We invite readers to embark on this scholarly journey with a receptive mind and a pinch of whimsy.

ChatGPT:

Theodore, popularity, fossil fuel, correlation analysis, first name, Burundi, US Social Security Administration, Energy Information Administration, correlation coefficient, p-value, causation, statistical significance, nomenclature, scholarly journey

*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

Popularity of the first name Theodore
Detailed data title: Babies of all sexes born in the US named Theodore
Source: US Social Security Administration
See what else correlates with Popularity of the first name Theodore

Fossil fuel use in Burundi
Detailed data title: Total fossil fuel use in Burundi in billion kWh
Source: Energy Information Administration
See what else correlates with Fossil fuel use in Burundi

Correlation r = 0.9807962 (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 = 0.9619612 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 96.2% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Fossil fuel use in Burundi) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Popularity of the first name Theodore) over the 42 years from 1980 through 2021.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0. 0.0000000000000000000000000000
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 0.98 in 0% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated
Warning: Division by zero in /var/www/html/spurious/_CORRELATION_VIEW_PAGE.php on line 631
inf random variables
Warning: Division by zero in /var/www/html/spurious/_CORRELATION_VIEW_PAGE.php on line 633
You don't actually need
Warning: Division by zero in /var/www/html/spurious/_CORRELATION_VIEW_PAGE.php on line 638

Notice: Undefined offset: 10 in /var/www/html/spurious/_CORRELATION_VIEW_PAGE.php on line 567
INF variables to find a correlation like this one.
Warning: Division by zero in /var/www/html/spurious/_CORRELATION_VIEW_PAGE.php on line 638
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.
Warning: Division by zero in /var/www/html/spurious/_CORRELATION_VIEW_PAGE.php on line 641


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 41 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 41 because we have two variables measured over a period of 42 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.

[ 0.96, 0.99 ] 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.
198019811982198319841985198619871988198919901991199219931994199519961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172018201920202021
Popularity of the first name Theodore (Babies born)12011144119711701074122712701228124712921232109610901036939956905956983913934935975964100510951133113711391239133215731949242832284153491659667083789986419589
Fossil fuel use in Burundi (Billion kWh)0.0010.0020.0020.0020.0020.0010.0010.0010.0010.0010.0020.0020.0020.0020.0020.0020.0010.0010.0020.0020.0020.0020.0020.0020.0020.0020.0020.0020.0020.0020.0020.0120.0030.0260.0370.0330.0290.0790.105090.1229460.1167330.124204




Why this works

  1. Data dredging: I have 25,153 variables in my database. I compare all these variables against each other to find ones that randomly match up. That's 632,673,409 correlation calculations! This is called “data dredging.” Instead of starting with a hypothesis and testing it, I instead abused the data to see what correlations shake out. It’s a dangerous way to go about analysis, because any sufficiently large dataset will yield strong correlations completely at random.
  2. Lack of causal connection: There is probably Because these pages are automatically generated, it's possible that the two variables you are viewing are in fact causually related. I take steps to prevent the obvious ones from showing on the site (I don't let data about the weather in one city correlate with the weather in a neighboring city, for example), but sometimes they still pop up. If they are related, cool! You found a loophole.
    no direct connection between these variables, despite what the AI says above. This is exacerbated by the fact that I used "Years" as the base variable. Lots of things happen in a year that are not related to each other! Most studies would use something like "one person" in stead of "one year" to be the "thing" studied.
  3. Observations not independent: For many variables, sequential years are not independent of each other. If a population of people is continuously doing something every day, there is no reason to think they would suddenly change how they are doing that thing on January 1. A simple Personally I don't find any p-value calculation to be 'simple,' but you know what I mean.
    p-value calculation does not take this into account, so mathematically it appears less probable than it really is.
  4. Confounding variable: 2020 is particularly different from the other years on this graph. Confounding variables (like global pandemics) will cause two variables to look connected when in fact a "sneaky third" variable is influencing both of them behind the scenes.
  5. Outlandish outliers: There are "outliers" in this data. In concept, "outlier" just means "way different than the rest of your dataset." When calculating a correlation like this, they are particularly impactful because a single outlier can substantially increase your correlation.

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

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




Try it yourself

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

    return correlation, r_squared, p_value

# These are the arrays for the variables shown on this page, but you can modify them to be any two sets of numbers
array_1 = np.array([1201,1144,1197,1170,1074,1227,1270,1228,1247,1292,1232,1096,1090,1036,939,956,905,956,983,913,934,935,975,964,1005,1095,1133,1137,1139,1239,1332,1573,1949,2428,3228,4153,4916,5966,7083,7899,8641,9589,])
array_2 = np.array([0.001,0.002,0.002,0.002,0.002,0.001,0.001,0.001,0.001,0.001,0.002,0.002,0.002,0.002,0.002,0.002,0.001,0.001,0.002,0.002,0.002,0.002,0.002,0.002,0.002,0.002,0.002,0.002,0.002,0.002,0.002,0.012,0.003,0.026,0.037,0.033,0.029,0.079,0.10509,0.122946,0.116733,0.124204,])
array_1_name = "Popularity of the first name Theodore"
array_2_name = "Fossil fuel use in Burundi"

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

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



Reuseable content

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

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

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

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

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

Download images for these variables:


View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Your rating skills are legendary!


Correlation ID: 2393 · Black Variable ID: 2578 · Red Variable ID: 23561
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0