Bacha 2000

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   38  0.5156  0.0065  0.0553  0.0578  0.0361  0.04
Anderszewski 2003   63  0.4157  0.0045  0.0544  0.1172  0.0344  0.06
Ashkenazy 1981   25  0.5935  0.0023  0.0715  0.4061  0.0329  0.11
Bacha 2000   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Badura 1965   84  0.1438  0.0079  0.0283  0.0287  0.0286  0.02
Barbosa 1983   65  0.4022  0.0138  0.0535  0.1868  0.0342  0.07
Biret 1990   4  0.694  0.078  0.152  0.5631  0.1910  0.33
Blet 2003   48  0.4681  0.0077  0.0378  0.0381  0.0372  0.03
Block 1995   27  0.5654  0.0017  0.0729  0.2725  0.2615  0.26
Blumental 1952   75  0.3131  0.0060  0.0464  0.0456  0.0463  0.04
Boshniakovich 1969   41  0.5032  0.0053  0.0465  0.0461  0.0464  0.04
Brailowsky 1960   9  0.6612  0.025  0.1112  0.4719  0.366  0.41
Bunin 1987   73  0.3669  0.0084  0.0471  0.0481  0.0375  0.03
Bunin 1987b   72  0.3640  0.0083  0.0280  0.0281  0.0380  0.02
Chiu 1999   42  0.5017  0.026  0.126  0.5217  0.394  0.45
Cohen 1997   32  0.5346  0.0019  0.0924  0.3110  0.439  0.37
Cortot 1951   71  0.3663  0.0082  0.0281  0.0283  0.0288  0.02
Csalog 1996   5  0.6920  0.0120  0.109  0.4812  0.473  0.47
Czerny 1949   79  0.2849  0.0075  0.0372  0.0373  0.0374  0.03
Czerny 1990   61  0.4164  0.0071  0.0470  0.0485  0.0277  0.03
Duchoud 2007   31  0.5462  0.0049  0.0550  0.0555  0.0462  0.04
Ezaki 2006   39  0.5123  0.0135  0.0540  0.1284  0.0250  0.05
Falvay 1989   11  0.668  0.039  0.163  0.5535  0.1611  0.30
Farrell 1958   7  0.6858  0.0032  0.0630  0.2267  0.0436  0.09
Ferenczy 1958   45  0.4821  0.0163  0.0554  0.0570  0.0360  0.04
Fliere 1977   28  0.5688  0.0047  0.0746  0.0781  0.0351  0.05
Fou 1978   21  0.6018  0.0124  0.1016  0.4053  0.0618  0.15
Francois 1956   60  0.4282  0.0066  0.0648  0.0681  0.0367  0.04
Friedman 1923   89  0.0076  0.0091  0.0191  0.0182  0.0390  0.02
Friedman 1923b   87  0.0172  0.0090  0.0289  0.0285  0.0387  0.02
Friedman 1930   88  0.0090  0.0087  0.0282  0.0286  0.0284  0.02
Garcia 2007   57  0.4370  0.0056  0.0460  0.0436  0.2037  0.09
Garcia 2007b   83  0.1824  0.0151  0.0461  0.0438  0.1049  0.06
Gierzod 1998   8  0.6719  0.0112  0.1010  0.4761  0.0420  0.14
Gornostaeva 1994   33  0.5352  0.0058  0.0551  0.0585  0.0276  0.03
Groot 1988   20  0.6128  0.0140  0.0638  0.1474  0.0347  0.06
Harasiewicz 1955   81  0.2141  0.0042  0.0642  0.1187  0.0348  0.06
Hatto 1993   51  0.4465  0.0015  0.1128  0.3045  0.0721  0.14
Hatto 1997   40  0.5047  0.0022  0.0727  0.3156  0.0330  0.10
Horowitz 1949   43  0.4974  0.0041  0.0539  0.1451  0.0539  0.08
Indjic 1988   47  0.4714  0.0214  0.0822  0.3239  0.1216  0.20
Kapell 1951   36  0.5237  0.0064  0.0647  0.0663  0.0453  0.05
Kissin 1993   29  0.5683  0.0026  0.0626  0.3161  0.0427  0.11
Kushner 1989   26  0.5830  0.0043  0.0543  0.1167  0.0343  0.06
Luisada 1991   16  0.622  0.142  0.141  0.5716  0.392  0.47
Lushtak 2004   49  0.4659  0.0030  0.0633  0.2176  0.0341  0.08
Malcuzynski 1961   23  0.6036  0.0054  0.0456  0.0455  0.0457  0.04
Magaloff 1978   14  0.6360  0.0016  0.0720  0.3750  0.0423  0.12
Magin 1975   50  0.4484  0.0044  0.0545  0.1060  0.0352  0.05
Michalowski 1933   85  0.1125  0.0162  0.0467  0.0472  0.0458  0.04
Milkina 1970   1  0.731  0.141  0.144  0.5319  0.375  0.44
Mohovich 1999   17  0.6244  0.0028  0.0625  0.3172  0.0331  0.10
Moravec 1969   30  0.5548  0.0036  0.0436  0.1635  0.1517  0.15
Morozova 2008   78  0.2926  0.0137  0.0641  0.1178  0.0345  0.06
Neighaus 1950   19  0.6211  0.0225  0.1319  0.3763  0.0424  0.12
Niedzielski 1931   46  0.4773  0.0052  0.0466  0.0431  0.1838  0.08
Ohlsson 1999   13  0.6466  0.0013  0.087  0.5137  0.1613  0.29
Osinska 1989   44  0.4942  0.0033  0.0634  0.2067  0.0433  0.09
Pachmann 1927   37  0.5113  0.0231  0.0737  0.1448  0.0540  0.08
Paderewski 1930   53  0.4450  0.0061  0.0462  0.0468  0.0371  0.03
Perlemuter 1992   67  0.3815  0.0248  0.0552  0.0571  0.0355  0.04
Pierdomenico 2008   52  0.4475  0.0039  0.0531  0.2263  0.0434  0.09
Poblocka 1999   10  0.6616  0.0221  0.0821  0.3364  0.0425  0.11
Rabcewiczowa 1932   68  0.3833  0.0059  0.0649  0.0671  0.0356  0.04
Rachmaninoff 1923   82  0.2143  0.0076  0.0373  0.0378  0.0368  0.03
Rangell 2001   6  0.687  0.053  0.1018  0.3832  0.2114  0.28
Richter 1976   62  0.4189  0.0068  0.0375  0.0385  0.0370  0.03
Rosen 1989   2  0.706  0.057  0.1513  0.4525  0.358  0.40
Rosenthal 1930   76  0.3167  0.0086  0.0286  0.0289  0.0191  0.01
Rosenthal 1931   70  0.3785  0.0074  0.0374  0.0380  0.0283  0.02
Rosenthal 1931b   58  0.4377  0.0067  0.0458  0.0461  0.0466  0.04
Rosenthal 1931c   66  0.4029  0.0178  0.0285  0.0287  0.0289  0.02
Rosenthal 1931d   35  0.5386  0.0055  0.0463  0.0458  0.0565  0.04
Rossi 2007   90  -0.0471  0.0080  0.0288  0.0278  0.0279  0.02
Rubinstein 1939   69  0.3755  0.0070  0.0469  0.0435  0.2135  0.09
Rubinstein 1952   15  0.6353  0.0018  0.0714  0.4224  0.407  0.41
Rubinstein 1966   22  0.6039  0.0050  0.0555  0.0563  0.0459  0.04
Schilhawsky 1960   55  0.4368  0.0057  0.0457  0.0486  0.0273  0.03
Shebanova 2002   3  0.699  0.034  0.115  0.5216  0.471  0.49
Smith 1975   56  0.4378  0.0046  0.0459  0.0468  0.0369  0.03
Sokolov 2002   59  0.4234  0.0072  0.0379  0.0384  0.0278  0.02
Sztompka 1959   74  0.3291  0.0085  0.0377  0.0381  0.0281  0.02
Tomsic 1995   18  0.625  0.0629  0.0823  0.3166  0.0426  0.11
Uninsky 1932   80  0.2427  0.0181  0.0287  0.0282  0.0385  0.02
Uninsky 1971   64  0.4045  0.0073  0.0376  0.0385  0.0282  0.02
Wasowski 1980   54  0.4361  0.0034  0.0632  0.2159  0.0432  0.09
Zak 1937   24  0.593  0.0810  0.148  0.4839  0.1712  0.29
Zak 1951   34  0.5310  0.0211  0.1411  0.4753  0.0519  0.15
Average   12  0.6551  0.0027  0.0717  0.4077  0.0328  0.11
Random 1   86  0.0179  0.0089  0.0290  0.0244  0.1254  0.05
Random 2   91  -0.0980  0.0088  0.0284  0.0236  0.1646  0.06
Random 3   77  0.3087  0.0069  0.0468  0.0410  0.4522  0.13

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).