Block 1995

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   35  0.7220  0.0041  0.0455  0.0418  0.3135  0.11
Ashkenazy 1981   8  0.7842  0.0013  0.139  0.5030  0.2219  0.33
Beliavsky 2004   37  0.7156  0.0039  0.0452  0.0421  0.2636  0.10
BenOr 1989   3  0.8113  0.012  0.242  0.5921  0.442  0.51
Biret 1990   6  0.799  0.019  0.1713  0.4833  0.1127  0.23
Blet 2003   32  0.7210  0.0126  0.1029  0.2217  0.3224  0.27
Block 1995   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Brailowsky 1960   31  0.727  0.0230  0.0730  0.1413  0.4725  0.26
Chiu 1999   22  0.7522  0.0018  0.1018  0.4027  0.3612  0.38
Clidat 1994   40  0.6940  0.0042  0.0550  0.0533  0.0752  0.06
Cohen 1997   39  0.7027  0.0035  0.0735  0.0711  0.3430  0.15
Coop 1987   5  0.793  0.054  0.1310  0.5023  0.433  0.46
Cortot 1951   25  0.7429  0.0036  0.0734  0.0736  0.0746  0.07
Czerny 1949   41  0.6960  0.0048  0.0546  0.0541  0.0851  0.06
Czerny 1949b   50  0.6653  0.0051  0.0547  0.0539  0.0943  0.07
Ezaki 2006   20  0.7539  0.0029  0.1228  0.2651  0.0632  0.12
Falvay 1989   10  0.7818  0.0016  0.1215  0.4125  0.2817  0.34
Ferenczy 1958   51  0.6523  0.0052  0.0453  0.0425  0.2538  0.10
Fiorentino 1962   15  0.7612  0.0111  0.155  0.5624  0.345  0.44
Fliere 1977   11  0.7734  0.0022  0.1019  0.3924  0.3613  0.37
Fou 1978   23  0.7452  0.0020  0.0821  0.3528  0.2222  0.28
Francois 1956   63  0.4262  0.0063  0.0639  0.0632  0.1542  0.09
Hatto 1997   36  0.7143  0.0043  0.0638  0.0640  0.0750  0.06
Horowitz 1971   56  0.6161  0.0058  0.0363  0.0350  0.0565  0.04
Horowitz 1985   60  0.5838  0.0059  0.0542  0.0524  0.2334  0.11
Indjic 2001   30  0.7364  0.0037  0.0833  0.0843  0.0644  0.07
Kapell 1951   33  0.7265  0.0033  0.0636  0.0643  0.0648  0.06
Kiepura 1999   38  0.7145  0.0031  0.0531  0.1114  0.4628  0.22
Kilenyi 1937   27  0.7332  0.0019  0.0724  0.3131  0.2721  0.29
Kissin 1993   7  0.7811  0.018  0.127  0.5427  0.2615  0.37
Kitain 1937   62  0.5416  0.0060  0.0541  0.0522  0.3033  0.12
Kushner 1990   61  0.5549  0.0062  0.0459  0.0461  0.0463  0.04
Levy 1951   17  0.7617  0.0014  0.0714  0.4229  0.2020  0.29
Luisada 1990   26  0.7358  0.0034  0.0540  0.0540  0.0753  0.06
Lushtak 2004   44  0.684  0.0444  0.0548  0.0537  0.0659  0.05
Lympany 1968   42  0.6931  0.0049  0.0460  0.0426  0.2140  0.09
Magaloff 1977   16  0.7654  0.0012  0.1411  0.5025  0.3211  0.40
Magaloff 1977b   14  0.7626  0.0010  0.158  0.5224  0.384  0.44
Magin 1975   12  0.7715  0.0024  0.1122  0.3427  0.4710  0.40
Milkina 1970   45  0.6750  0.0054  0.0543  0.0542  0.0655  0.05
Mohovich 1999   34  0.7235  0.0032  0.0532  0.1161  0.0445  0.07
Nadelmann 1956   49  0.6641  0.0050  0.0549  0.0539  0.0656  0.05
Ohlsson 1999   43  0.6933  0.0038  0.0544  0.0538  0.0749  0.06
Olejniczac 1990   13  0.7719  0.006  0.124  0.5826  0.318  0.42
Olejniczak 1991   28  0.7351  0.0025  0.1223  0.3131  0.2323  0.27
Osinska 1989   21  0.7548  0.0027  0.0925  0.2951  0.0631  0.13
Paderewski 1912   55  0.6359  0.0047  0.0458  0.0442  0.0658  0.05
Perahia 1994   58  0.608  0.0245  0.0461  0.0433  0.0660  0.05
Perlemuter 1986   52  0.6528  0.0055  0.0456  0.0425  0.2737  0.10
Poblocka 1999   2  0.812  0.063  0.206  0.5626  0.336  0.43
Rangell 2001   18  0.7646  0.0017  0.0717  0.4028  0.3216  0.36
Risler 1920   59  0.5857  0.0040  0.0462  0.0438  0.0847  0.06
Rosen 1989   57  0.6144  0.0061  0.0637  0.0643  0.0561  0.05
Rubinstein 1939   54  0.6325  0.0056  0.0451  0.0425  0.2041  0.09
Rubinstein 1952   48  0.6630  0.0053  0.0545  0.0555  0.0562  0.05
Rubinstein 1966   53  0.6463  0.0057  0.0457  0.0449  0.0564  0.04
Rummel 1943   47  0.6721  0.0021  0.0826  0.2814  0.3918  0.33
Shebanova 2002   46  0.6736  0.0046  0.0454  0.0436  0.0657  0.05
Smith 1975   24  0.7424  0.0028  0.1127  0.2839  0.0929  0.16
Szpilman 1948   29  0.7337  0.0015  0.1016  0.4019  0.439  0.41
Uninsky 1971   9  0.7814  0.017  0.133  0.598  0.541  0.56
Wasowski 1980   19  0.765  0.0323  0.0920  0.3631  0.1526  0.23
Weissenberg 1971   4  0.816  0.025  0.1112  0.4926  0.2814  0.37
Average   1  0.861  0.641  0.631  0.8428  0.227  0.43
Random 1    66  -0.0566  0.0066  0.0166  0.0161  0.0266  0.01
Random 2   64  0.0447  0.0064  0.0364  0.038  0.3639  0.10
Random 3   65  -0.0155  0.0065  0.0265  0.0223  0.2054  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).