Francois 1956

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   22  0.5220  0.0025  0.0921  0.3639  0.0614  0.15
Ashkenazy 1981   33  0.4544  0.0042  0.0646  0.0647  0.0648  0.06
Beliavsky 2004   34  0.4547  0.0036  0.0838  0.0858  0.0443  0.06
BenOr 1989   11  0.5417  0.0124  0.1120  0.3846  0.0615  0.15
Biret 1990   51  0.3959  0.0053  0.0644  0.0650  0.0562  0.05
Blet 2003   10  0.5415  0.0116  0.1310  0.5547  0.0510  0.17
Block 1995   43  0.4228  0.0032  0.0832  0.1539  0.0633  0.09
Brailowsky 1960   24  0.5164  0.0014  0.1414  0.5060  0.0416  0.14
Chiu 1999   36  0.4538  0.0034  0.0836  0.0846  0.0634  0.07
Clidat 1994   38  0.4522  0.0019  0.1122  0.3564  0.0330  0.10
Cohen 1997   30  0.4849  0.0037  0.0741  0.0741  0.0649  0.06
Coop 1987   56  0.3757  0.0059  0.0553  0.0549  0.0656  0.05
Cortot 1951   26  0.4942  0.0029  0.1125  0.3041  0.0625  0.13
Czerny 1949   60  0.3550  0.0061  0.0456  0.0460  0.0566  0.04
Czerny 1949b   48  0.4027  0.0051  0.0648  0.0651  0.0554  0.05
Ezaki 2006   47  0.4053  0.0056  0.0458  0.0454  0.0650  0.05
Falvay 1989   7  0.586  0.055  0.213  0.7459  0.049  0.17
Ferenczy 1958   12  0.5454  0.0021  0.0930  0.2261  0.0432  0.09
Fiorentino 1962   29  0.4814  0.0127  0.0827  0.2944  0.0624  0.13
Fliere 1977   25  0.4955  0.0028  0.0926  0.2960  0.0427  0.11
Fou 1978   50  0.3939  0.0044  0.0742  0.0748  0.0642  0.06
Francois 1956   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Hatto 1997   3  0.594  0.106  0.292  0.7641  0.075  0.23
Horowitz 1971   13  0.5423  0.0011  0.1011  0.5457  0.0513  0.16
Horowitz 1985   53  0.3835  0.0047  0.0649  0.0651  0.0551  0.05
Indjic 2001   5  0.589  0.027  0.196  0.7259  0.0411  0.17
Kapell 1951   44  0.4216  0.0146  0.0552  0.0547  0.0655  0.05
Kiepura 1999   35  0.4546  0.0049  0.0647  0.0640  0.0639  0.06
Kilenyi 1937   62  0.3440  0.0060  0.0364  0.0351  0.0565  0.04
Kissin 1993   57  0.3658  0.0045  0.0551  0.0545  0.0658  0.05
Kitain 1937   58  0.3566  0.0043  0.0645  0.0662  0.0460  0.05
Kushner 1990   52  0.3833  0.0048  0.0554  0.0547  0.0557  0.05
Levy 1951   23  0.5110  0.0215  0.1115  0.5058  0.0417  0.14
Luisada 1990   59  0.3560  0.0063  0.0555  0.0559  0.0559  0.05
Lushtak 2004   20  0.5243  0.0023  0.1324  0.3451  0.0523  0.13
Lympany 1968   15  0.5321  0.0020  0.0917  0.4763  0.0326  0.12
Magaloff 1977   39  0.4437  0.0041  0.0835  0.0849  0.0635  0.07
Magaloff 1977b   37  0.4525  0.0040  0.0643  0.0651  0.0647  0.06
Magin 1975   45  0.4136  0.0055  0.0457  0.0447  0.0653  0.05
Milkina 1970   9  0.577  0.044  0.188  0.5930  0.134  0.28
Mohovich 1999   2  0.6018  0.018  0.124  0.7352  0.058  0.19
Nadelmann 1956   18  0.5211  0.0122  0.1019  0.4245  0.0612  0.16
Ohlsson 1999   32  0.4619  0.0035  0.1033  0.1059  0.0444  0.06
Olejniczac 1990   31  0.4629  0.0033  0.0934  0.0947  0.0636  0.07
Olejniczak 1991   55  0.3732  0.0058  0.0461  0.0453  0.0652  0.05
Osinska 1989   28  0.4951  0.0031  0.1031  0.1950  0.0628  0.11
Paderewski 1912   46  0.4126  0.0039  0.0739  0.0743  0.0646  0.06
Perahia 1994   1  0.612  0.193  0.2112  0.5324  0.163  0.29
Perlemuter 1986   4  0.593  0.172  0.315  0.7315  0.441  0.57
Poblocka 1999   42  0.4463  0.0050  0.0650  0.0650  0.0640  0.06
Rangell 2001   54  0.3745  0.0054  0.0462  0.0453  0.0661  0.05
Risler 1920   63  0.2552  0.0062  0.0459  0.0456  0.0564  0.04
Rosen 1989   6  0.581  0.201  0.207  0.6519  0.332  0.46
Rubinstein 1939   40  0.4448  0.0030  0.1129  0.2444  0.0529  0.11
Rubinstein 1952   41  0.4431  0.0038  0.0837  0.0842  0.0638  0.07
Rubinstein 1966   21  0.5234  0.0018  0.1318  0.4657  0.0420  0.14
Rummel 1943   17  0.5356  0.0012  0.1323  0.3463  0.0331  0.10
Shebanova 2002   14  0.5312  0.0117  0.1013  0.5262  0.0421  0.14
Smith 1975   16  0.5313  0.0113  0.139  0.5944  0.067  0.19
Szpilman 1948   61  0.3441  0.0057  0.0460  0.0448  0.0563  0.04
Uninsky 1971   27  0.498  0.0410  0.1116  0.5057  0.0419  0.14
Wasowski 1980   19  0.5224  0.0026  0.0928  0.2948  0.0622  0.13
Weissenberg 1971   49  0.4030  0.0052  0.0740  0.0749  0.0641  0.06
Average   8  0.575  0.059  0.141  0.7941  0.066  0.22
Random 1    64  0.0661  0.0064  0.0363  0.032  0.6218  0.14
Random 2   66  -0.0262  0.0065  0.0265  0.0220  0.2045  0.06
Random 3   65  0.0165  0.0066  0.0166  0.019  0.4637  0.07

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).