about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #6,179 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is GMO use in cotton and the second variable is Popularity of the first name Bailey.  The chart goes from 2000 to 2022, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As GMO use in cotton decreased, so did the softness and comfort of the cotton. This led to a worldwide shortage of irresistibly cozy bedding and pajamas, creating a collective discomfort among people. Subconsciously, this discomfort became associated with the name Bailey, leading to a decrease in its popularity as parents opted for names they could more comfortably pronounce and spell in their sleep-deprived state.

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image of a bedroom with a futuristic twist. The room should have a cozy atmosphere, with a bed made of altered cotton bedding that lacks its former softness due to a decrease in GMO use. People should be depicted tossing and turning restlessly in discomfort. A baby name book should be visible on the bedside table, with the name Bailey losing popularity in favor of easier-to-pronounce and spell names. The scene should portray a subtle sense of unease and shortage, with a futuristic touch in the decor and lighting. 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: GMO use in cotton and Popularity of the first name Bailey. 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 Realistic Data cyber art Data cyber art Futuristic
ChatGPT: Futuristic

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 GMO use in cotton and Popularity of the first name Bailey, in the following situation: As GMO use in cotton decreased, so did the softness and comfort of the cotton. This led to a worldwide shortage of irresistibly cozy bedding and pajamas, creating a collective discomfort among people. Subconsciously, this discomfort became associated with the name Bailey, leading to a decrease in its popularity as parents opted for names they could more comfortably pronounce and spell in their sleep-deprived state.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a cozy bedroom, the once plush cotton bedding and pajamas have lost their softness and comfort due to a decrease in GMO use. People toss and turn restlessly, feeling the discomfort caused by the shortage of irresistibly cozy cotton. Meanwhile, a baby name book remains untouched on the bedside table, as the name Bailey's popularity fades in favor of easier-to-pronounce and spell names.

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: [ Futuristic ] and depicting this scene: In a cozy bedroom, the once plush cotton bedding and pajamas have lost their softness and comfort due to a decrease in GMO use. People toss and turn restlessly, feeling the discomfort caused by the shortage of irresistibly cozy cotton. Meanwhile, a baby name book remains untouched on the bedside table, as the name Bailey's popularity fades in favor of easier-to-pronounce and spell names. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image of a bedroom with a futuristic twist. The room should have a cozy atmosphere, with a bed made of altered cotton bedding that lacks its former softness due to a decrease in GMO use. People should be depicted tossing and turning restlessly in discomfort. A baby name book should be visible on the bedside table, with the name Bailey losing popularity in favor of easier-to-pronounce and spell names. The scene should portray a subtle sense of unease and shortage, with a futuristic touch in the decor and lighting.

*Variations in the User Prompts from chart to chart are just the result of random number generation in Python. I wrote a few arrays of various styles and methods to ask questions to change up the results. Every time this site writes an explanation or generates an image, the script picks from each at random.

I sequence the requests into multiple prompts because I find GPT 3.5 to perform much better with short, well-managed contexts. Thus, I track the context directly in Python and only ask ChatGPT targeted questions.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 (fine-tuned)
System prompt: You provide humorous responses in the form of plausible sounding explanations for correlations. You assume the correlation is causative for the purpose of the explanation even if it is ridiculous. You do not chat with the user, you only reply with the causal connection explanation and nothing else.
User prompt: Please make up a funny explanation for how a decrease in GMO use in cotton caused Popularity of the first name Bailey to decrease. Make it feel plausible.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
GMO Cotton and the 'Bailey' Trend: A Genetically Modified Name Connection?

The Journal of Biotechnological Quirkiness

Feb 2024

Reminder: This paper is AI-generated. Not real!
Quick note: This sequence is long and repetitive. That's how the prompt engineering works for this one. I manage the output in Python to format it into this PDF.




Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You write titles and abstracts of goofy academic research papers.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, and add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton and Popularity of the first name Bailey. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Include a pun in the title.

Your research team used data from USDA and US Social Security Administration to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.8250268 and p < 0.01 for 2000 to 2022.

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

[[TITLE]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit

[[ABSTRACT]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit



ChatGPT:
[[TITLE]]
"GMO Cotton and the 'Bailey' Trend: A Genetically Modified Name Connection?"

[[ABSTRACT]]
The rise of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in agriculture has sparked not only debates about their safety and impact on the environment, but also curiosity about their potential influence on humanity itself. Our research delves into the unexpected realm of baby names, specifically focusing on the popularity of the first name Bailey and its intriguing correlation with GMO cotton usage. Utilizing data from the USDA and the US Social Security Administration, we scrutinized the period from 2000 to 2022 and uncovered a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8250268, with a p-value less than 0.01.

Our findings not only raise eyebrows but also raise questions about the interplay between agricultural advancements and societal naming trends. Could it be that the cultivation of GMO cotton has inadvertently sown the seeds of preference for the name Bailey? Or is it simply a statistical fluke, akin to finding a needle in a haystack? Regardless, this research offers a lighthearted yet thought-provoking exploration of the intersection between genetic modification and nomenclature, serving as a reminder that correlations can often be as puzzling as they are intriguing.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft the introduction section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton and Popularity of the first name Bailey. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"GMO Cotton and the 'Bailey' Trend: A Genetically Modified Name Connection?"

[[ABSTRACT]]
The rise of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in agriculture has sparked not only debates about their safety and impact on the environment, but also curiosity about their potential influence on humanity itself. Our research delves into the unexpected realm of baby names, specifically focusing on the popularity of the first name Bailey and its intriguing correlation with GMO cotton usage. Utilizing data from the USDA and the US Social Security Administration, we scrutinized the period from 2000 to 2022 and uncovered a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8250268, with a p-value less than 0.01.

Our findings not only raise eyebrows but also raise questions about the interplay between agricultural advancements and societal naming trends. Could it be that the cultivation of GMO cotton has inadvertently sown the seeds of preference for the name Bailey? Or is it simply a statistical fluke, akin to finding a needle in a haystack? Regardless, this research offers a lighthearted yet thought-provoking exploration of the intersection between genetic modification and nomenclature, serving as a reminder that correlations can often be as puzzling as they are intriguing.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

The intersection of agricultural biotechnology and human society is a fertile ground for unexpected discoveries. In recent years, genetically modified organisms (GMOs) have not only transformed the landscape of agriculture but have also sown seeds of curiosity about their potential impact on human behavior. In this study, we pivot from the fields of agronomy to the registry of human names, as we delve into the whimsical yet intriguing correlation between the use of GMO cotton and the popularity of the first name Bailey.

At first glance, one might be forgiven for thinking this study was simply a flight of whimsy. However, our endeavor unfolds to reveal a compelling statistical relationship that leaves us pondering whether this connection is merely a chance encounter or a result of some deeper cultural phenomenon. As we embark on this journey, we heed the words of Mark Twain who sagely remarked, "The secret of getting ahead is getting started." In the case of exploring correlations between agricultural practices and nomenclature, indeed, the journey of a thousand correlations begins with a single dataset.

We begin by acknowledging that the name Bailey, like a rare vintage, has its own distinct flavor in the tapestry of human nomenclature. Its etymological roots harken back to the Old English word "baili," meaning a steward or an officer of the court. However, in our modern lexicon, Bailey has transcended its historical origins to become a name that evokes an image of conviviality and perhaps even a touch of mischief, echoing the sentiments of its titular cocktail. Like an enigmatic terroir, the appeal of Bailey as a name has persisted through the ages, adapting and evolving with the times.

Simultaneously, the rise of GMO cotton has woven an intricate thread through the fabric of modern agriculture. Genetically modified to resist pests and withstand herbicides, GMO cotton has not only altered the dynamics of crop production but has also sparked fervent debates about its ecological and socioeconomic impact. With these two seemingly disparate threads in hand, we set out to unravel whether a bountiful harvest of GMO cotton has coincided with a bumper crop of babies christened with the name Bailey.

In this paper, we embark on a whimsical yet scholarly escapade, where we confront the quizzical conundrum of GMO cotton and the 'Bailey' trend. Through rigorous statistical analyses and a sprinkle of mirth, we seek to shed light on this peculiar correlation, offering both a scholarly investigation and a touch of levity. As we tread the path less traveled by researchers, we invite our readers to join us in this delightful romp through the statistical fields, where surprises lurk around every regression and the unexpected takes root in the fertile soil of scholarly inquiry.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft a literature review section of an academic research paper, that starts out dry for the first few sentences but then becomes hilarious and goofy.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton and Popularity of the first name Bailey. 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 cite some social media posts you read that seem to be related.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"GMO Cotton and the 'Bailey' Trend: A Genetically Modified Name Connection?"

[[ABSTRACT]]
The rise of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in agriculture has sparked not only debates about their safety and impact on the environment, but also curiosity about their potential influence on humanity itself. Our research delves into the unexpected realm of baby names, specifically focusing on the popularity of the first name Bailey and its intriguing correlation with GMO cotton usage. Utilizing data from the USDA and the US Social Security Administration, we scrutinized the period from 2000 to 2022 and uncovered a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8250268, with a p-value less than 0.01.

Our findings not only raise eyebrows but also raise questions about the interplay between agricultural advancements and societal naming trends. Could it be that the cultivation of GMO cotton has inadvertently sown the seeds of preference for the name Bailey? Or is it simply a statistical fluke, akin to finding a needle in a haystack? Regardless, this research offers a lighthearted yet thought-provoking exploration of the intersection between genetic modification and nomenclature, serving as a reminder that correlations can often be as puzzling as they are intriguing.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The intersection of agricultural biotechnology and human society is a fertile ground for unexpected discoveries. In recent years, genetically modified organisms (GMOs) have not only transformed the landscape of agriculture but have also sown seeds of curiosity about their potential impact on human behavior. In this study, we pivot from the fields of agronomy to the registry of human names, as we delve into the whimsical yet intriguing correlation between the use of GMO cotton and the popularity of the first name Bailey.
At first glance, one might be forgiven for thinking this study was simply a flight of whimsy. However, our endeavor unfolds to reveal a compelling statistical relationship that leaves us pondering whether this connection is merely a chance encounter or a result of some deeper cultural phenomenon. As we embark on this journey, we heed the words of Mark Twain who sagely remarked, "The secret of getting ahead is getting started." In the case of exploring correlations between agricultural practices and nomenclature, indeed, the journey of a thousand correlations begins with a single dataset.
We begin by acknowledging that the name Bailey, like a rare vintage, has its own distinct flavor in the tapestry of human nomenclature. Its etymological roots harken back to the Old English word "baili," meaning a steward or an officer of the court. However, in our modern lexicon, Bailey has transcended its historical origins to become a name that evokes an image of conviviality and perhaps even a touch of mischief, echoing the sentiments of its titular cocktail. Like an enigmatic terroir, the appeal of Bailey as a name has persisted through the ages, adapting and evolving with the times.
Simultaneously, the rise of GMO cotton has woven an intricate thread through the fabric of modern agriculture. Genetically modified to resist pests and withstand herbicides, GMO cotton has not only altered the dynamics of crop production but has also sparked fervent debates about its ecological and socioeconomic impact. With these two seemingly disparate threads in hand, we set out to unravel whether a bountiful harvest of GMO cotton has coincided with a bumper crop of babies christened with the name Bailey.
In this paper, we embark on a whimsical yet scholarly escapade, where we confront the quizzical conundrum of GMO cotton and the 'Bailey' trend. Through rigorous statistical analyses and a sprinkle of mirth, we seek to shed light on this peculiar correlation, offering both a scholarly investigation and a touch of levity. As we tread the path less traveled by researchers, we invite our readers to join us in this delightful romp through the statistical fields, where surprises lurk around every regression and the unexpected takes root in the fertile soil of scholarly inquiry.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

To delve into the whimsical yet intriguing correlation between the use of GMO cotton and the popularity of the first name Bailey, we journey through a cultivated landscape of literature and pop culture references, akin to wading through cotton fields at twilight, with a dash of scholarly whimsy and a pinch of statistical levity.

First, we turn to the estimable works of Smith and Doe, who trod the verdant paths of agricultural genetics and societal nomenclature. In "Genetically Modified Organisms: Unveiling the Enigma," Smith proffers insight into the ramifications of GMO crops on agricultural ecosystems, while Doe, in "The Name Game: A Sociolinguistic Study," examines the etymological evolution of personal monikers. These esteemed scholars, though not directly explicating the contemporaneous conjunction of GMO cotton and the name Bailey, provide a foundation for our delightfully enigmatic exploration.

Venturing further, we encounter Jones's "Transgenic Cotton: A Comprehensive Analysis," which, while meticulous in its dissection of transgenic cotton varieties, inexplicably omits any discourse on nomenclatural implications. Nevertheless, the wealth of information accumulated by Jones augments the soil from which our peculiar correlation sprouts.

Turning to non-fiction literature, we leaf through "The Omnivore's Dilemma" by Michael Pollan and "Freakonomics" by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner. Though ostensibly unrelated to our inquiry, these tomes offer tangential contemplations on the interconnectedness of agricultural advancements and societal phenomena.

In the realm of fiction, we encounter "The Name of the Wind" by Patrick Rothfuss and "The Cotton Queen" by Pamela Morsi. While the former endeavors to unravel the enigma of a mythic protagonist, the latter flits through the hallowed meadows of cotton fields, instilling a sense of whimsy that resonates with our academic dalliance.

Our intrepid journey is not confined to the hallowed halls of libraries and dusty tomes, for we gleaned unexpected insights from social media posts that tantalizingly gestured towards the GMO cotton and Bailey nexus. In a Twitter thread, a user humorously quipped, "Are we witnessing the Baileypocalypse or merely the whimsy of statistical happenstance? #GMOBaileyMystery." Although not a scholarly source per se, this tweet stirred our academic spirits with its blend of humor and inquiry.

As we meander through this literature-laden labyrinth, we ponder the implications of our findings with scholarly glee, evoking the sage words of Albert Einstein, who mused, "The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious." Indeed, our exploration of the charm and curiosity of the GMO cotton and 'Bailey' trend substantiates the captivating allure of statistical inquiry, nourished by a delightful medley of literature and wit.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft the methodology section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton and Popularity of the first name Bailey. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from USDA and US Social Security Administration . You used data from 2000 to 2022

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

Here is the title, abstract, and introduction of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"GMO Cotton and the 'Bailey' Trend: A Genetically Modified Name Connection?"

[[ABSTRACT]]
The rise of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in agriculture has sparked not only debates about their safety and impact on the environment, but also curiosity about their potential influence on humanity itself. Our research delves into the unexpected realm of baby names, specifically focusing on the popularity of the first name Bailey and its intriguing correlation with GMO cotton usage. Utilizing data from the USDA and the US Social Security Administration, we scrutinized the period from 2000 to 2022 and uncovered a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8250268, with a p-value less than 0.01.

Our findings not only raise eyebrows but also raise questions about the interplay between agricultural advancements and societal naming trends. Could it be that the cultivation of GMO cotton has inadvertently sown the seeds of preference for the name Bailey? Or is it simply a statistical fluke, akin to finding a needle in a haystack? Regardless, this research offers a lighthearted yet thought-provoking exploration of the intersection between genetic modification and nomenclature, serving as a reminder that correlations can often be as puzzling as they are intriguing.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
The intersection of agricultural biotechnology and human society is a fertile ground for unexpected discoveries. In recent years, genetically modified organisms (GMOs) have not only transformed the landscape of agriculture but have also sown seeds of curiosity about their potential impact on human behavior. In this study, we pivot from the fields of agronomy to the registry of human names, as we delve into the whimsical yet intriguing correlation between the use of GMO cotton and the popularity of the first name Bailey.
At first glance, one might be forgiven for thinking this study was simply a flight of whimsy. However, our endeavor unfolds to reveal a compelling statistical relationship that leaves us pondering whether this connection is merely a chance encounter or a result of some deeper cultural phenomenon. As we embark on this journey, we heed the words of Mark Twain who sagely remarked, "The secret of getting ahead is getting started." In the case of exploring correlations between agricultural practices and nomenclature, indeed, the journey of a thousand correlations begins with a single dataset.
We begin by acknowledging that the name Bailey, like a rare vintage, has its own distinct flavor in the tapestry of human nomenclature. Its etymological roots harken back to the Old English word "baili," meaning a steward or an officer of the court. However, in our modern lexicon, Bailey has transcended its historical origins to become a name that evokes an image of conviviality and perhaps even a touch of mischief, echoing the sentiments of its titular cocktail. Like an enigmatic terroir, the appeal of Bailey as a name has persisted through the ages, adapting and evolving with the times.
Simultaneously, the rise of GMO cotton has woven an intricate thread through the fabric of modern agriculture. Genetically modified to resist pests and withstand herbicides, GMO cotton has not only altered the dynamics of crop production but has also sparked fervent debates about its ecological and socioeconomic impact. With these two seemingly disparate threads in hand, we set out to unravel whether a bountiful harvest of GMO cotton has coincided with a bumper crop of babies christened with the name Bailey.
In this paper, we embark on a whimsical yet scholarly escapade, where we confront the quizzical conundrum of GMO cotton and the 'Bailey' trend. Through rigorous statistical analyses and a sprinkle of mirth, we seek to shed light on this peculiar correlation, offering both a scholarly investigation and a touch of levity. As we tread the path less traveled by researchers, we invite our readers to join us in this delightful romp through the statistical fields, where surprises lurk around every regression and the unexpected takes root in the fertile soil of scholarly inquiry.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To unravel the enigmatic correlation between GMO cotton usage and the popularity of the first name Bailey, we embarked on a data-driven journey that utilized a multi-pronged approach. Our primary data sources were gleaned from the unsung heroes of statistical repositories: the USDA and the US Social Security Administration. Through this motley crew of data, we sought to distill the essence of the Bailey phenomenon and its potential linkage to the cultivation of GMO cotton.

First, we conducted a comprehensive analysis of GMO cotton usage across the years 2000 to 2022, meticulously scouring through USDA databases like intrepid explorers in search of statistical treasure. We examined the acreage of genetically modified cotton planted, the adoption rates among farmers, and the geographical distribution of these modified crops. Like detectives piecing together clues, we sought to gain a holistic understanding of the proliferation of GMO cotton and its temporal evolution.

Simultaneously, we delved into the annals of the US Social Security Administration's treasure trove of baby names, where we sifted through the nomenclatural zeitgeist to discern the ascent and descent of the first name Bailey over the same time period. This entailed quantifying the annual occurrence of the name Bailey, dissecting its regional popularity, and discerning any idiosyncratic fluctuations that might hint at a connection with the ebb and flow of GMO cotton cultivation.

The crux of our methodological meanderings lay in the deployment of robust statistical analyses. We calculated correlation coefficients to discern the strength and direction of the relationship between GMO cotton usage and the prevalence of the name Bailey. Moreover, we employed regression analyses to disentangle the potential influence of confounding variables, ensuring that our findings remained as unadulterated as the purest non-GMO seed.

In our quest for insightful revelations, we also conducted time series analyses to unravel the temporal dynamics of the 'Bailey' trend alongside the tumultuous tides of GMO cotton cultivation. This allowed us to discern any temporal synchrony or discordance that might shed light on the perpetuation or attenuation of the observed correlation.

Furthermore, we utilized geographic information systems (GIS) to map the geographic distribution of GMO cotton usage and juxtapose it with hotspots of Bailey prevalence. By overlaying these spatial kernels of information, we endeavored to uncover any geographic congruence that might hint at localized cultural or agricultural phenomena driving the observed correlation.

Lastly, to ensure the robustness and generalizability of our findings, we employed sensitivity analyses to test the stability of our results under varying statistical assumptions. Much like stress-testing a peculiarly resilient algorithm, these analyses scrutinized the veracity of our findings and lent credence to the robustness of the observed correlation.

In sum, our methodology danced through the esoteric domains of agricultural statistics, demography, and spatial analytics to offer a comprehensive and steadfast exploration of the GMO cotton-‘Bailey’ correlation. Through a harmonious interplay of statistical techniques, data mining, and a touch of whimsy, we endeavored to untangle the intricate web of interconnectivity between genetically modified crops and the moniker of Bailey, offering a prismatic analysis that venerates both precision and peculiarity.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft the results section of an academic research paper. You speak in the past tense (you found...).
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton and Popularity of the first name Bailey. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from USDA and US Social Security Administration .

For the time period 2000 to 2022, you found a correlation 0.8250268, r-squared of 0.6806693, 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]]
"GMO Cotton and the 'Bailey' Trend: A Genetically Modified Name Connection?"

[[ABSTRACT]]
The rise of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in agriculture has sparked not only debates about their safety and impact on the environment, but also curiosity about their potential influence on humanity itself. Our research delves into the unexpected realm of baby names, specifically focusing on the popularity of the first name Bailey and its intriguing correlation with GMO cotton usage. Utilizing data from the USDA and the US Social Security Administration, we scrutinized the period from 2000 to 2022 and uncovered a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8250268, with a p-value less than 0.01.

Our findings not only raise eyebrows but also raise questions about the interplay between agricultural advancements and societal naming trends. Could it be that the cultivation of GMO cotton has inadvertently sown the seeds of preference for the name Bailey? Or is it simply a statistical fluke, akin to finding a needle in a haystack? Regardless, this research offers a lighthearted yet thought-provoking exploration of the intersection between genetic modification and nomenclature, serving as a reminder that correlations can often be as puzzling as they are intriguing.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
The intersection of agricultural biotechnology and human society is a fertile ground for unexpected discoveries. In recent years, genetically modified organisms (GMOs) have not only transformed the landscape of agriculture but have also sown seeds of curiosity about their potential impact on human behavior. In this study, we pivot from the fields of agronomy to the registry of human names, as we delve into the whimsical yet intriguing correlation between the use of GMO cotton and the popularity of the first name Bailey.
At first glance, one might be forgiven for thinking this study was simply a flight of whimsy. However, our endeavor unfolds to reveal a compelling statistical relationship that leaves us pondering whether this connection is merely a chance encounter or a result of some deeper cultural phenomenon. As we embark on this journey, we heed the words of Mark Twain who sagely remarked, "The secret of getting ahead is getting started." In the case of exploring correlations between agricultural practices and nomenclature, indeed, the journey of a thousand correlations begins with a single dataset.
We begin by acknowledging that the name Bailey, like a rare vintage, has its own distinct flavor in the tapestry of human nomenclature. Its etymological roots harken back to the Old English word "baili," meaning a steward or an officer of the court. However, in our modern lexicon, Bailey has transcended its historical origins to become a name that evokes an image of conviviality and perhaps even a touch of mischief, echoing the sentiments of its titular cocktail. Like an enigmatic terroir, the appeal of Bailey as a name has persisted through the ages, adapting and evolving with the times.
Simultaneously, the rise of GMO cotton has woven an intricate thread through the fabric of modern agriculture. Genetically modified to resist pests and withstand herbicides, GMO cotton has not only altered the dynamics of crop production but has also sparked fervent debates about its ecological and socioeconomic impact. With these two seemingly disparate threads in hand, we set out to unravel whether a bountiful harvest of GMO cotton has coincided with a bumper crop of babies christened with the name Bailey.
In this paper, we embark on a whimsical yet scholarly escapade, where we confront the quizzical conundrum of GMO cotton and the 'Bailey' trend. Through rigorous statistical analyses and a sprinkle of mirth, we seek to shed light on this peculiar correlation, offering both a scholarly investigation and a touch of levity. As we tread the path less traveled by researchers, we invite our readers to join us in this delightful romp through the statistical fields, where surprises lurk around every regression and the unexpected takes root in the fertile soil of scholarly inquiry.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The statistical analysis unveiled a remarkably robust correlation between the use of genetically modified organism (GMO) cotton and the popularity of the first name Bailey. With a correlation coefficient of 0.8250268 and an r-squared value of 0.6806693, the relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables left our research team both astounded and tickled. The p-value being less than 0.01 further emphasized the significance of this unexpected connection, prompting us to consider whether the seeds of Bailey's popularity were inadvertently sown in fields of GMO cotton.

Figure 1 illustrates the strong positive correlation between the two variables, reminiscent of the harmonious dance between a cotton gin and the fibers it processes. It depicts the upward trend of Bailey's popularity mirroring the increasing adoption of GMO cotton, almost as if the agricultural innovation were whispering sweet nothings to expectant parents across the nation, propagating the charm of the name Bailey.

As we contemplate the implications of our findings, it becomes evident that the intersection of agricultural biotechnology and human nomenclature holds more surprises than a genetically modified jack-in-the-box. This correlation presents a conundrum akin to a riddle wrapped in an enigma, leaving us pondering whether this relationship is a fluke or if there exists a deeper phenomenon at play.

In conclusion, this statistical caper through the agricultural and naming landscapes has produced a captivating finding that elicits both amusement and contemplation. As we peel back the layers of this unexpected correlation, we are reminded that, much like the threads of GMO cotton, the fabric of human behavior and nomenclature can weave surprising connections that merit further exploration. And so, we offer this study as a lighthearted yet compelling inquiry into the whimsical world of statistical oddities, where the unexpected can often turn out to be the most fascinating discovery of all.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft the discussion section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton and Popularity of the first name Bailey. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Limit your response to 500 tokens.

Here are the title, abstract, literature review, and results sections. Please harken back to 1-2 of the goofy items in the literature review, but pretend to take them completely seriously. Discuss how your results supported the prior research.

Do not write a conclusion. I will add a conclusion after this.

[[TITLE]]
"GMO Cotton and the 'Bailey' Trend: A Genetically Modified Name Connection?"

[[ABSTRACT]]
The rise of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in agriculture has sparked not only debates about their safety and impact on the environment, but also curiosity about their potential influence on humanity itself. Our research delves into the unexpected realm of baby names, specifically focusing on the popularity of the first name Bailey and its intriguing correlation with GMO cotton usage. Utilizing data from the USDA and the US Social Security Administration, we scrutinized the period from 2000 to 2022 and uncovered a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8250268, with a p-value less than 0.01.

Our findings not only raise eyebrows but also raise questions about the interplay between agricultural advancements and societal naming trends. Could it be that the cultivation of GMO cotton has inadvertently sown the seeds of preference for the name Bailey? Or is it simply a statistical fluke, akin to finding a needle in a haystack? Regardless, this research offers a lighthearted yet thought-provoking exploration of the intersection between genetic modification and nomenclature, serving as a reminder that correlations can often be as puzzling as they are intriguing.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
To delve into the whimsical yet intriguing correlation between the use of GMO cotton and the popularity of the first name Bailey, we journey through a cultivated landscape of literature and pop culture references, akin to wading through cotton fields at twilight, with a dash of scholarly whimsy and a pinch of statistical levity.
First, we turn to the estimable works of Smith and Doe, who trod the verdant paths of agricultural genetics and societal nomenclature. In "Genetically Modified Organisms: Unveiling the Enigma," Smith proffers insight into the ramifications of GMO crops on agricultural ecosystems, while Doe, in "The Name Game: A Sociolinguistic Study," examines the etymological evolution of personal monikers. These esteemed scholars, though not directly explicating the contemporaneous conjunction of GMO cotton and the name Bailey, provide a foundation for our delightfully enigmatic exploration.
Venturing further, we encounter Jones's "Transgenic Cotton: A Comprehensive Analysis," which, while meticulous in its dissection of transgenic cotton varieties, inexplicably omits any discourse on nomenclatural implications. Nevertheless, the wealth of information accumulated by Jones augments the soil from which our peculiar correlation sprouts.
Turning to non-fiction literature, we leaf through "The Omnivore's Dilemma" by Michael Pollan and "Freakonomics" by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner. Though ostensibly unrelated to our inquiry, these tomes offer tangential contemplations on the interconnectedness of agricultural advancements and societal phenomena.
In the realm of fiction, we encounter "The Name of the Wind" by Patrick Rothfuss and "The Cotton Queen" by Pamela Morsi. While the former endeavors to unravel the enigma of a mythic protagonist, the latter flits through the hallowed meadows of cotton fields, instilling a sense of whimsy that resonates with our academic dalliance.
Our intrepid journey is not confined to the hallowed halls of libraries and dusty tomes, for we gleaned unexpected insights from social media posts that tantalizingly gestured towards the GMO cotton and Bailey nexus. In a Twitter thread, a user humorously quipped, "Are we witnessing the Baileypocalypse or merely the whimsy of statistical happenstance? #GMOBaileyMystery." Although not a scholarly source per se, this tweet stirred our academic spirits with its blend of humor and inquiry.
As we meander through this literature-laden labyrinth, we ponder the implications of our findings with scholarly glee, evoking the sage words of Albert Einstein, who mused, "The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious." Indeed, our exploration of the charm and curiosity of the GMO cotton and 'Bailey' trend substantiates the captivating allure of statistical inquiry, nourished by a delightful medley of literature and wit.

[[RESULTS]]
The statistical analysis unveiled a remarkably robust correlation between the use of genetically modified organism (GMO) cotton and the popularity of the first name Bailey. With a correlation coefficient of 0.8250268 and an r-squared value of 0.6806693, the relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables left our research team both astounded and tickled. The p-value being less than 0.01 further emphasized the significance of this unexpected connection, prompting us to consider whether the seeds of Bailey's popularity were inadvertently sown in fields of GMO cotton.
Figure 1 illustrates the strong positive correlation between the two variables, reminiscent of the harmonious dance between a cotton gin and the fibers it processes. It depicts the upward trend of Bailey's popularity mirroring the increasing adoption of GMO cotton, almost as if the agricultural innovation were whispering sweet nothings to expectant parents across the nation, propagating the charm of the name Bailey.
As we contemplate the implications of our findings, it becomes evident that the intersection of agricultural biotechnology and human nomenclature holds more surprises than a genetically modified jack-in-the-box. This correlation presents a conundrum akin to a riddle wrapped in an enigma, leaving us pondering whether this relationship is a fluke or if there exists a deeper phenomenon at play.
In conclusion, this statistical caper through the agricultural and naming landscapes has produced a captivating finding that elicits both amusement and contemplation. As we peel back the layers of this unexpected correlation, we are reminded that, much like the threads of GMO cotton, the fabric of human behavior and nomenclature can weave surprising connections that merit further exploration. And so, we offer this study as a lighthearted yet compelling inquiry into the whimsical world of statistical oddities, where the unexpected can often turn out to be the most fascinating discovery of all.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The robust correlation between the usage of genetically modified organism (GMO) cotton and the popularity of the first name Bailey has sown the seeds of curiosity in the agricultural and naming realms. Our findings not only bolster the work of previous scholars, akin to the steady growth of cotton plants in a sun-kissed field, but also beckon us to ponder the mysterious allure of statistical quirkiness in societal trends.

Harkening back to the whimsical notion proposed by Smith and Doe, their explorations into the ramifications of GMO crops and the etymological evolution of personal monikers set the stage for our unexpected uncovering. While their scholarly pursuits did not explicitly unravel the contemporary conjunction of GMO cotton and the name Bailey, our findings undeniably lend support to the tantalizing suggestion of an interplay between agricultural advancements and societal nomenclature. Much like a cotton-picking machine efficiently collects bolls, our statistical analysis adeptly harvested evidence that adds roots to this enigmatic correlation.

Jones's comprehensive analysis of transgenic cotton varieties, while curiously void of nomenclatural implications, provided fertile ground for our study. The bedrock of information amassed by Jones nourished the soil from which our bewildering correlation sprouted. It seems that much like a bountiful harvest, his scholarly endeavors unwittingly cultivated the terrain for our peculiar finding.

The tangential contemplations offered by Pollan and Levitt and Dubner, although seemingly unrelated to our inquiry, curiously hinted at the interconnectedness of agricultural advancements and societal phenomena, echoing the unanticipated linkage we stumbled upon. As we traverse the scholarly vines laden with unexpected sweet spots, it becomes evident that the intersection between agricultural biotechnology and human nomenclature is not merely a cotton candy dream but an enticing reality.

Our foray into the realm of social media, while departing from traditional scholarly sources, resonated like the first rustle of a cotton dress in a summer breeze. Although not a peer-reviewed platform, the humorous Twitter quip teasingly alluded to the GMO cotton and Bailey nexus. Much like a brief ray of sunshine breaking through a cloudy sky, it regaled us with its blend of levity and curiosity, bolstering our academic spirits with the whimsy of statistical inquiry.

In sum, our research enriches the agricultural and naming landscapes with a sprightful yet compelling revelation. As we unravel the layers of this unexpected correlation, we are reminded that, much like the threads of GMO cotton, the fabric of human behavior and nomenclature can weave surprising connections. It appears that this whimsical correlation between GMO cotton and the name Bailey, much like a self-pollinating plant, bears the fruits of a delightful statistical oddity, ripe for further exploration.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft the discussion section of goofy academic research papers that sounds like it belongs based on the title and abstract provided.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton and Popularity of the first name Bailey. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Limit your response to 300 tokens. At the very end, assert that no more research is needed in this area.

Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
"GMO Cotton and the 'Bailey' Trend: A Genetically Modified Name Connection?"

[[ABSTRACT]]
The rise of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in agriculture has sparked not only debates about their safety and impact on the environment, but also curiosity about their potential influence on humanity itself. Our research delves into the unexpected realm of baby names, specifically focusing on the popularity of the first name Bailey and its intriguing correlation with GMO cotton usage. Utilizing data from the USDA and the US Social Security Administration, we scrutinized the period from 2000 to 2022 and uncovered a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8250268, with a p-value less than 0.01.

Our findings not only raise eyebrows but also raise questions about the interplay between agricultural advancements and societal naming trends. Could it be that the cultivation of GMO cotton has inadvertently sown the seeds of preference for the name Bailey? Or is it simply a statistical fluke, akin to finding a needle in a haystack? Regardless, this research offers a lighthearted yet thought-provoking exploration of the intersection between genetic modification and nomenclature, serving as a reminder that correlations can often be as puzzling as they are intriguing.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
The intersection of agricultural biotechnology and human society is a fertile ground for unexpected discoveries. In recent years, genetically modified organisms (GMOs) have not only transformed the landscape of agriculture but have also sown seeds of curiosity about their potential impact on human behavior. In this study, we pivot from the fields of agronomy to the registry of human names, as we delve into the whimsical yet intriguing correlation between the use of GMO cotton and the popularity of the first name Bailey.
At first glance, one might be forgiven for thinking this study was simply a flight of whimsy. However, our endeavor unfolds to reveal a compelling statistical relationship that leaves us pondering whether this connection is merely a chance encounter or a result of some deeper cultural phenomenon. As we embark on this journey, we heed the words of Mark Twain who sagely remarked, "The secret of getting ahead is getting started." In the case of exploring correlations between agricultural practices and nomenclature, indeed, the journey of a thousand correlations begins with a single dataset.
We begin by acknowledging that the name Bailey, like a rare vintage, has its own distinct flavor in the tapestry of human nomenclature. Its etymological roots harken back to the Old English word "baili," meaning a steward or an officer of the court. However, in our modern lexicon, Bailey has transcended its historical origins to become a name that evokes an image of conviviality and perhaps even a touch of mischief, echoing the sentiments of its titular cocktail. Like an enigmatic terroir, the appeal of Bailey as a name has persisted through the ages, adapting and evolving with the times.
Simultaneously, the rise of GMO cotton has woven an intricate thread through the fabric of modern agriculture. Genetically modified to resist pests and withstand herbicides, GMO cotton has not only altered the dynamics of crop production but has also sparked fervent debates about its ecological and socioeconomic impact. With these two seemingly disparate threads in hand, we set out to unravel whether a bountiful harvest of GMO cotton has coincided with a bumper crop of babies christened with the name Bailey.
In this paper, we embark on a whimsical yet scholarly escapade, where we confront the quizzical conundrum of GMO cotton and the 'Bailey' trend. Through rigorous statistical analyses and a sprinkle of mirth, we seek to shed light on this peculiar correlation, offering both a scholarly investigation and a touch of levity. As we tread the path less traveled by researchers, we invite our readers to join us in this delightful romp through the statistical fields, where surprises lurk around every regression and the unexpected takes root in the fertile soil of scholarly inquiry.

[[RESULTS]]
The statistical analysis unveiled a remarkably robust correlation between the use of genetically modified organism (GMO) cotton and the popularity of the first name Bailey. With a correlation coefficient of 0.8250268 and an r-squared value of 0.6806693, the relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables left our research team both astounded and tickled. The p-value being less than 0.01 further emphasized the significance of this unexpected connection, prompting us to consider whether the seeds of Bailey's popularity were inadvertently sown in fields of GMO cotton.
Figure 1 illustrates the strong positive correlation between the two variables, reminiscent of the harmonious dance between a cotton gin and the fibers it processes. It depicts the upward trend of Bailey's popularity mirroring the increasing adoption of GMO cotton, almost as if the agricultural innovation were whispering sweet nothings to expectant parents across the nation, propagating the charm of the name Bailey.
As we contemplate the implications of our findings, it becomes evident that the intersection of agricultural biotechnology and human nomenclature holds more surprises than a genetically modified jack-in-the-box. This correlation presents a conundrum akin to a riddle wrapped in an enigma, leaving us pondering whether this relationship is a fluke or if there exists a deeper phenomenon at play.
In conclusion, this statistical caper through the agricultural and naming landscapes has produced a captivating finding that elicits both amusement and contemplation. As we peel back the layers of this unexpected correlation, we are reminded that, much like the threads of GMO cotton, the fabric of human behavior and nomenclature can weave surprising connections that merit further exploration. And so, we offer this study as a lighthearted yet compelling inquiry into the whimsical world of statistical oddities, where the unexpected can often turn out to be the most fascinating discovery of all.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In the irrepressible saga of agricultural biotechnology and human naming conventions, our odyssey has unraveled a statistically robust link between the adoption of GMO cotton and the burgeoning popularity of the name Bailey. This correlation, akin to stumbling upon a diamond in the roughage, has left us both bemused and exhilarated by the whimsical yet compelling bond that transcends fields and nurseries alike.

Much like seeds carried on the wind, this discovery beckons us to contemplate the enigmatic interplay between the cultivation of genetically modified crops and the perennial appeal of nomenclature. Could it be that the tendrils of GMO cotton have gently entwined with the subconscious desires of parents, whispering the name Bailey into their hearts? Or perhaps, this correlation is a sly wink from the statistical universe, reminding us that even seemingly disparate entities can engage in an elegant waltz of numerical harmony.

As we bid adieu to this enchanting statistical reverie, it is clear that the allure of Bailey's name has weathered the winds of time, much like the hardy GMO cotton plants swaying in the fields. Whether this correlation is a mere statistical quirk or a serendipitous revelation of societal idiosyncrasies, it beckons us to ponder the unpredictable tapestry of human behavior and the subtleties of cultural influences, akin to deciphering a cryptic crossword puzzle with a twist of puns.

In the realm of scholarly pursuits, we embrace the unexpected and the absurd with the same fervor as the logical and methodical. This study, a blend of statistical rigor and lighthearted whimsy, serves as a gentle nudge to our academic brethren, reminding us that amidst the labyrinth of serious inquiries, the occasional detour into the realm of improbable correlations can yield delightful surprises.

In sum, our findings tantalize the imagination and offer a scholarly musing on the delightful capriciousness of statistical escapades. This study stands as a testament to the enduring intrigue of the unexpected and serves as a cheerful herald of the sheer delight that can be gleaned from the unlikeliest of statistical unions.

In conclusion, as we bid farewell to this unconventional statistical dalliance, we assert with unwavering certainty that no further research is needed in this area. The statistical stars have aligned, and the name Bailey shall reign as a whimsical yet compelling testament to the unpredictable dance of statistical odds.


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 GMO Cotton and the 'Bailey' Trend: A Genetically Modified Name Connection?. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Biotechnological Quirkiness


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 GMO Cotton and the 'Bailey' Trend: A Genetically Modified Name Connection?. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for Agricultural Genetics and Trend Analysis (SAGTA)


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 GMO Cotton and the 'Bailey' Trend: A Genetically Modified Name Connection? with an abstract of The rise of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in agriculture has sparked not only debates about their safety and impact on the environment, but also curiosity about their potential influence on humanity itself. Our research delves into the unexpected realm of baby names, specifically focusing on the popularity of the first name Bailey and its intriguing correlation with GMO cotton usage. Utilizing data from the USDA and the US Social Security Administration, we scrutinized the period from 2000 to 2022 and uncovered a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8250268, with a p-value less than 0.01.
Our findings not only raise eyebrows but also raise questions about the interplay between agricultural advancements and societal naming trends. Could it be that the cultivation of GMO cotton has inadvertently sown the seeds of preference for the name Bailey? Or is it simply a statistical fluke, akin to finding a needle in a haystack? Regardless, this research offers a lighthearted yet thought-provoking exploration of the intersection between genetic modification and nomenclature, serving as a reminder that correlations can often be as puzzling as they are intriguing.

ChatGPT:

GMO cotton, Bailey name trend, genetically modified organisms, agriculture, baby names, USDA data, US Social Security Administration data, correlation coefficient, agricultural advancements, societal naming trends, genetic modification, nomenclature, statistical analysis

*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

GMO use in cotton
Detailed data title: Percent of cotton planted in United States that is genetically modified to be herbicide-tolerant (HT), but not insect-resistant (Bt)
Source: USDA
See what else correlates with GMO use in cotton

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

Correlation r = 0.8250268 (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 = 0.6806693 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 68.1% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Popularity of the first name Bailey) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., GMO use in cotton) over the 23 years from 2000 through 2022.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 1.3E-6. 0.0000012742082132571919000000
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 0.83 in 0.00013% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 784,801 random variables You don't actually need 784 thousand variables to find a correlation like this one. I don't have that many variables in my database. You can also correlate variables that are not independent. I do this a lot.

p-value calculations are useful for understanding the probability of a result happening by chance. They are most useful when used to highlight the risk of a fluke outcome. For example, if you calculate a p-value of 0.30, the risk that the result is a fluke is high. It is good to know that! But there are lots of ways to get a p-value of less than 0.01, as evidenced by this project.

In this particular case, the values are so extreme as to be meaningless. That's why no one reports p-values with specificity after they drop below 0.01.

Just to be clear: I'm being completely transparent about the calculations. There is no math trickery. This is just how statistics shakes out when you calculate hundreds of millions of random correlations.
with the same 22 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 22 because we have two variables measured over a period of 23 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.

[ 0.63, 0.92 ] 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.
20002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022
GMO use in cotton (GMO cotton %)2632363230272628232320151715121091196866
Popularity of the first name Bailey (Babies born)64035573451342263908346833444288418338603793348435343142308329622820257423031937175518881762




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. 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([26,32,36,32,30,27,26,28,23,23,20,15,17,15,12,10,9,11,9,6,8,6,6,])
array_2 = np.array([6403,5573,4513,4226,3908,3468,3344,4288,4183,3860,3793,3484,3534,3142,3083,2962,2820,2574,2303,1937,1755,1888,1762,])
array_1_name = "GMO use in cotton"
array_2_name = "Popularity of the first name Bailey"

# 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 correlation whisperer we needed!


Correlation ID: 6179 · Black Variable ID: 789 · Red Variable ID: 2098
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0