Brailowsky 1960

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   1  0.758  0.035  0.194  0.623  0.652  0.63
Ashkenazy 1981   20  0.6850  0.0032  0.0831  0.1553  0.0534  0.09
Beliavsky 2004   23  0.6834  0.0014  0.0915  0.3730  0.1914  0.27
BenOr 1989   2  0.755  0.052  0.202  0.6640  0.0719  0.21
Biret 1990   24  0.6839  0.0038  0.0742  0.0751  0.0550  0.06
Blet 2003   12  0.7056  0.0024  0.1119  0.3237  0.0623  0.14
Block 1995   5  0.729  0.037  0.1512  0.4829  0.1613  0.28
Brailowsky 1960   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Chiu 1999   39  0.6563  0.0030  0.0632  0.1457  0.0535  0.08
Clidat 1994   4  0.742  0.104  0.187  0.544  0.624  0.58
Cohen 1997   22  0.6848  0.0021  0.0818  0.3311  0.349  0.33
Coop 1987   36  0.656  0.0339  0.0736  0.0753  0.0545  0.06
Cortot 1951   8  0.7123  0.0017  0.1114  0.4242  0.0525  0.14
Czerny 1949   14  0.6913  0.0243  0.0646  0.0647  0.0646  0.06
Czerny 1949b   59  0.5755  0.0061  0.0552  0.0560  0.0459  0.04
Ezaki 2006   52  0.6252  0.0059  0.0456  0.0457  0.0556  0.04
Falvay 1989   3  0.7410  0.036  0.186  0.5629  0.1711  0.31
Ferenczy 1958   26  0.6742  0.0036  0.0834  0.0814  0.4021  0.18
Fiorentino 1962   27  0.6754  0.0031  0.0730  0.1658  0.0436  0.08
Fliere 1977   9  0.713  0.0911  0.2010  0.5032  0.1315  0.25
Fou 1978   43  0.6338  0.0035  0.0737  0.0750  0.0543  0.06
Francois 1956   61  0.5122  0.0055  0.0459  0.0414  0.5126  0.14
Hatto 1997   48  0.6265  0.0051  0.0455  0.0453  0.0561  0.04
Horowitz 1971   44  0.6311  0.0315  0.0923  0.2711  0.4010  0.33
Horowitz 1985   57  0.5841  0.0047  0.0739  0.0731  0.1331  0.10
Indjic 2001   40  0.6464  0.0049  0.0647  0.0656  0.0455  0.05
Kapell 1951   42  0.6432  0.0042  0.0743  0.0752  0.0544  0.06
Kiepura 1999   35  0.6558  0.0046  0.0738  0.0731  0.1330  0.10
Kilenyi 1937   29  0.6714  0.0222  0.0916  0.3642  0.0722  0.16
Kissin 1993   11  0.704  0.0610  0.195  0.5833  0.1116  0.25
Kitain 1937   51  0.6230  0.0020  0.0721  0.292  0.687  0.44
Kushner 1990   55  0.5833  0.0057  0.0362  0.0347  0.0560  0.04
Levy 1951   31  0.6640  0.0018  0.0928  0.2356  0.0529  0.11
Luisada 1990   47  0.6349  0.0060  0.0460  0.0455  0.0653  0.05
Lushtak 2004   50  0.6253  0.0053  0.0457  0.0438  0.0654  0.05
Lympany 1968   21  0.6817  0.018  0.1520  0.3118  0.2812  0.29
Magaloff 1977   45  0.6362  0.0034  0.0740  0.0750  0.0647  0.06
Magaloff 1977b   46  0.6335  0.0033  0.0835  0.0847  0.0639  0.07
Magin 1975   30  0.6621  0.0048  0.0933  0.0941  0.0637  0.07
Milkina 1970   6  0.7216  0.0112  0.129  0.5012  0.415  0.45
Mohovich 1999   13  0.6931  0.0016  0.0913  0.4253  0.0524  0.14
Nadelmann 1956   25  0.6726  0.0027  0.0927  0.2345  0.0627  0.12
Ohlsson 1999   58  0.5744  0.0058  0.0458  0.0461  0.0365  0.03
Olejniczac 1990   18  0.6829  0.0028  0.0826  0.2362  0.0433  0.10
Olejniczak 1991   53  0.6061  0.0050  0.0551  0.0562  0.0458  0.04
Osinska 1989   33  0.6643  0.0040  0.0741  0.0759  0.0540  0.06
Paderewski 1912   54  0.5947  0.0041  0.0648  0.0639  0.0648  0.06
Perahia 1994   60  0.5657  0.0052  0.0454  0.0452  0.0463  0.04
Perlemuter 1986   10  0.7136  0.0023  0.0917  0.356  0.566  0.44
Poblocka 1999   15  0.6924  0.0037  0.0645  0.0652  0.0641  0.06
Rangell 2001   56  0.5846  0.0054  0.0361  0.0355  0.0664  0.04
Risler 1920   62  0.4759  0.0062  0.0549  0.0553  0.0551  0.05
Rosen 1989   38  0.6525  0.0025  0.0925  0.2411  0.478  0.34
Rubinstein 1939   7  0.727  0.033  0.231  0.691  0.671  0.68
Rubinstein 1952   28  0.6720  0.0026  0.0924  0.2543  0.0628  0.12
Rubinstein 1966   32  0.6612  0.0219  0.0822  0.2828  0.1818  0.22
Rummel 1943   17  0.681  0.371  0.363  0.632  0.623  0.62
Shebanova 2002   49  0.6228  0.0056  0.0453  0.0462  0.0462  0.04
Smith 1975   19  0.6827  0.0013  0.1111  0.4942  0.0720  0.19
Szpilman 1948   41  0.6418  0.0129  0.0829  0.1953  0.0532  0.10
Uninsky 1971   16  0.6815  0.019  0.158  0.5332  0.1217  0.25
Wasowski 1980   34  0.6619  0.0144  0.0550  0.0556  0.0457  0.04
Weissenberg 1971   37  0.6537  0.0045  0.0744  0.0754  0.0542  0.06
Random 1    65  -0.0151  0.0064  0.0264  0.0226  0.2638  0.07
Random 2   64  0.0060  0.0063  0.0263  0.0224  0.1352  0.05
Random 3   63  0.0045  0.0065  0.0265  0.0224  0.1949  0.06

Note: To load data table give above into Excel, copy and paste the data into a text editor (such as WordPad) first, then copy the text in the editor and past into Excel. You should remove the "target" line from the data before pasting into Excel so that plotting graphs of the data is done properly.

Column descriptions

  • Performance:
  • 0-Rank/0-Score: 0-Score is equivalent to Pearson correlation of the entire data sequence between the reference performance and a test performance. 0-Rank is the sorting order of the 0-scores (highest score has a rank of 1).
  • 1-Rank/1-Score: 1-Score is the area fraction covered by a particular performance in the scape plot (see image above). These values should not be taken literally, since they are sensitive to the Hatto Effect.
  • 2-Rank/2-Score: 2-Score values are equivalent to 1-Score values with all higher-ranking performances removed before the calculation of the area of coverage in the scape is calculated. Improvment over the 1-Rank scores, but still somewhat sensitive to the Hatto Effect.
  • 3-Rank/3-Score: Similar to 2-Rank calculations. The bottom 1/2 of the 2-rank performances are kept constant as a noise floor for the similarity measurement. Then one-by-one the top 1/2 of the 2-rank performances are superimposed with the noise-floor performances, and a 3-score is measured as the area covered in the scape. This measure is not sentisive to the Hatto Effect.
  • 3R-Rank/3R-Score: Reverse 3-rank/3-scores. 3-rankings and scores are not symmetric (A->B values are different from B->A values). So this column represents similarity measures in the opposite direction.
  • 4-Rank/4-Score: The geometric mean between 3-scores and 3R-scores. This column gives the best overall similarity ranking between the various performances (see color codes below).
  • NED: Noise Equivalient Distance (not yet implemented)

Color codes for 3-rank listings:

  • red = strongly similar performance to target
  • orange = moderately similar performance
  • yellow = weakly similar performance
  • green = marginally similar/dissimilar performance
  • white = dissimilar to target
  • blue = false positive (has high 3-rank score but low 3R-rank score)

3-rank/scores are not symmetric, so the 3R-rank/score columns give the 3-rank/scores going in the opposite direction. More matches in the 3-rank column than in the 3R-rank column indicates an individualistic performance, while more matches in the 3R-rank column indicates a mainstream performance.

If a 3-rank and a 3R-rank are both marked as similar to each other, then there is a possible direct relation between the performances. If one is similar to the other but not in the reverse direction, then the similarity is more likely to be by chance (performers randomly chose a similar interpretation).