Ferenczy 1958

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   4  0.694  0.085  0.1811  0.4630  0.159  0.26
Ashkenazy 1981   29  0.6353  0.0048  0.0545  0.0544  0.0646  0.05
Beliavsky 2004   23  0.6412  0.0129  0.0829  0.1629  0.2113  0.18
BenOr 1989   2  0.7137  0.0017  0.1015  0.3858  0.0426  0.12
Biret 1990   43  0.6035  0.0041  0.0537  0.0557  0.0548  0.05
Blet 2003   34  0.6240  0.0031  0.0731  0.1546  0.0531  0.09
Block 1995   18  0.6521  0.0020  0.1125  0.2553  0.0428  0.10
Brailowsky 1960   9  0.6746  0.0010  0.1014  0.4034  0.0812  0.18
Chiu 1999   61  0.5236  0.0060  0.0363  0.0352  0.0550  0.04
Clidat 1994   45  0.5922  0.0039  0.0542  0.0557  0.0458  0.04
Cohen 1997   31  0.6216  0.0030  0.0730  0.1549  0.0433  0.08
Coop 1987   27  0.6417  0.0018  0.0920  0.2939  0.0817  0.15
Cortot 1951   28  0.6434  0.0021  0.0917  0.3249  0.0523  0.13
Czerny 1949   6  0.6910  0.0111  0.084  0.5829  0.215  0.35
Czerny 1949b   25  0.6455  0.0045  0.0448  0.0444  0.0740  0.05
Ezaki 2006   50  0.5848  0.0058  0.0362  0.0363  0.0361  0.03
Falvay 1989   53  0.5739  0.0056  0.0459  0.0447  0.0551  0.04
Ferenczy 1958   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Fiorentino 1962   46  0.5960  0.0044  0.0457  0.0442  0.0647  0.05
Fliere 1977   21  0.6544  0.0027  0.0826  0.2562  0.0329  0.09
Fou 1978   52  0.5727  0.0033  0.0538  0.0559  0.0453  0.04
Francois 1956   60  0.5451  0.0062  0.0461  0.0430  0.2232  0.09
Hatto 1997   51  0.5866  0.0057  0.0455  0.0461  0.0364  0.03
Horowitz 1971   22  0.645  0.029  0.138  0.5416  0.324  0.42
Horowitz 1985   55  0.569  0.0119  0.1023  0.2717  0.336  0.30
Indjic 2001   36  0.6162  0.0052  0.0635  0.0661  0.0445  0.05
Kapell 1951   59  0.5454  0.0053  0.0451  0.0462  0.0363  0.03
Kiepura 1999   20  0.6545  0.0047  0.0452  0.0461  0.0449  0.04
Kilenyi 1937   41  0.6038  0.0034  0.0450  0.0458  0.0456  0.04
Kissin 1993   32  0.6218  0.0012  0.0913  0.4052  0.0520  0.14
Kitain 1937   62  0.4819  0.0037  0.0454  0.0420  0.3227  0.11
Kushner 1990   58  0.547  0.0235  0.0458  0.0441  0.0641  0.05
Levy 1951   14  0.6611  0.0116  0.0910  0.4847  0.0516  0.15
Luisada 1990   56  0.5565  0.0063  0.0539  0.0550  0.0644  0.05
Lushtak 2004   42  0.6013  0.0038  0.0447  0.0446  0.0559  0.04
Lympany 1968   39  0.6115  0.0032  0.0632  0.1145  0.0534  0.07
Magaloff 1977   35  0.6152  0.0046  0.0449  0.0460  0.0557  0.04
Magaloff 1977b   37  0.6150  0.0049  0.0543  0.0561  0.0460  0.04
Magin 1975   48  0.5857  0.0061  0.0456  0.0461  0.0452  0.04
Milkina 1970   12  0.6633  0.0026  0.0924  0.2644  0.0625  0.12
Mohovich 1999   3  0.7120  0.008  0.149  0.5051  0.0515  0.16
Nadelmann 1956   47  0.5864  0.0036  0.0544  0.0554  0.0454  0.04
Ohlsson 1999   30  0.6224  0.0042  0.0636  0.0636  0.0736  0.06
Olejniczac 1990   44  0.6059  0.0043  0.0453  0.0445  0.0643  0.05
Olejniczak 1991   38  0.6143  0.0050  0.0541  0.0542  0.0735  0.06
Osinska 1989   17  0.6647  0.0028  0.0928  0.2163  0.0430  0.09
Paderewski 1912   15  0.662  0.242  0.382  0.709  0.561  0.63
Perahia 1994   11  0.668  0.0125  0.0727  0.2325  0.1511  0.19
Perlemuter 1986   54  0.5749  0.0055  0.0634  0.0642  0.0737  0.06
Poblocka 1999   16  0.6623  0.0013  0.0918  0.3256  0.0521  0.13
Rangell 2001   57  0.5528  0.0054  0.0633  0.0655  0.0638  0.06
Risler 1920   63  0.4541  0.0059  0.0460  0.0445  0.0739  0.05
Rosen 1989   26  0.6458  0.0024  0.0822  0.2837  0.0622  0.13
Rubinstein 1939   8  0.673  0.154  0.255  0.587  0.542  0.56
Rubinstein 1952   13  0.6632  0.0023  0.0719  0.3041  0.0624  0.13
Rubinstein 1966   10  0.6726  0.0015  0.0912  0.4628  0.197  0.30
Rummel 1943   19  0.6531  0.0022  0.0821  0.2834  0.0818  0.15
Shebanova 2002   49  0.5830  0.0051  0.0546  0.0534  0.0642  0.05
Smith 1975   7  0.6925  0.006  0.193  0.6535  0.118  0.27
Szpilman 1948   33  0.626  0.023  0.267  0.5521  0.423  0.48
Uninsky 1971   40  0.6142  0.0040  0.0540  0.0562  0.0355  0.04
Wasowski 1980   5  0.6929  0.007  0.176  0.5643  0.0710  0.20
Weissenberg 1971   24  0.6414  0.0014  0.1016  0.3750  0.0519  0.14
Average   1  0.751  0.351  0.351  0.8162  0.0414  0.18
Random 1    65  -0.0563  0.0065  0.0265  0.0247  0.0462  0.03
Random 2   64  -0.0456  0.0064  0.0264  0.0262  0.0265  0.02
Random 3   66  -0.0561  0.0066  0.0166  0.0147  0.0466  0.02

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).