Cortot 1951

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   31  0.4677  0.0045  0.0543  0.1151  0.0546  0.07
Anderszewski 2003   47  0.4152  0.0043  0.0444  0.1059  0.0354  0.05
Ashkenazy 1981   29  0.4778  0.0021  0.0722  0.3454  0.0534  0.13
Bacha 2000   75  0.3059  0.0082  0.0381  0.0355  0.0557  0.04
Badura 1965   43  0.4315  0.0130  0.0634  0.2532  0.2520  0.25
Barbosa 1983   71  0.3182  0.0062  0.0557  0.0564  0.0460  0.04
Biret 1990   28  0.4848  0.0031  0.0633  0.2542  0.1526  0.19
Blet 2003   40  0.4450  0.0044  0.0541  0.1466  0.0542  0.08
Block 1995   38  0.444  0.0913  0.1329  0.2744  0.1031  0.16
Blumental 1952   37  0.4431  0.0015  0.1115  0.3813  0.4314  0.40
Boshniakovich 1969   45  0.4225  0.0056  0.0555  0.0563  0.0365  0.04
Brailowsky 1960   59  0.3567  0.0074  0.0374  0.0361  0.0469  0.03
Bunin 1987   42  0.4383  0.0047  0.0651  0.0654  0.0651  0.06
Bunin 1987b   41  0.4388  0.0046  0.0649  0.0653  0.0648  0.06
Chiu 1999   76  0.2935  0.0077  0.0383  0.0368  0.0470  0.03
Cohen 1997   65  0.3344  0.0059  0.0648  0.0654  0.0555  0.05
Cortot 1951   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Csalog 1996   68  0.3216  0.0181  0.0384  0.0364  0.0479  0.03
Czerny 1949   7  0.5710  0.025  0.143  0.6018  0.522  0.56
Czerny 1990   35  0.4589  0.0048  0.0847  0.0852  0.0552  0.06
Duchoud 2007   26  0.4985  0.0032  0.0728  0.2842  0.1227  0.18
Ezaki 2006   14  0.5249  0.0022  0.0720  0.3568  0.0436  0.12
Falvay 1989   48  0.4037  0.0064  0.0554  0.0556  0.0553  0.05
Farrell 1958   15  0.5229  0.0024  0.0817  0.368  0.4810  0.42
Ferenczy 1958   4  0.593  0.103  0.217  0.574  0.543  0.55
Fliere 1977   32  0.4660  0.0055  0.0460  0.0484  0.0368  0.03
Fou 1978   80  0.2753  0.0085  0.0285  0.0274  0.0473  0.03
Francois 1956   27  0.4920  0.0116  0.1016  0.3737  0.1623  0.24
Friedman 1923   81  0.2733  0.0052  0.0945  0.0921  0.3429  0.17
Friedman 1923b   82  0.2647  0.0051  0.0559  0.0523  0.3235  0.13
Friedman 1930   66  0.3374  0.0042  0.0440  0.1533  0.2825  0.20
Garcia 2007   83  0.2561  0.0071  0.0469  0.0453  0.0564  0.04
Garcia 2007b   88  0.1262  0.0084  0.0382  0.0368  0.0385  0.03
Gierzod 1998   18  0.5154  0.0018  0.0614  0.3935  0.1619  0.25
Gornostaeva 1994   23  0.5024  0.0039  0.0738  0.1961  0.0441  0.09
Groot 1988   49  0.3986  0.0063  0.0553  0.0582  0.0282  0.03
Harasiewicz 1955   60  0.3523  0.0034  0.0639  0.1685  0.0347  0.07
Hatto 1993   84  0.2580  0.0069  0.0377  0.0376  0.0383  0.03
Hatto 1997   67  0.3363  0.0050  0.0465  0.0438  0.1345  0.07
Horowitz 1949   69  0.3268  0.0068  0.0380  0.0386  0.0287  0.02
Indjic 1988   85  0.2381  0.0070  0.0371  0.0386  0.0289  0.02
Kapell 1951   8  0.5634  0.008  0.209  0.5022  0.437  0.46
Kissin 1993   58  0.3655  0.0073  0.0379  0.0387  0.0288  0.02
Kushner 1989   19  0.5128  0.0037  0.0531  0.2678  0.0338  0.09
Luisada 1991   73  0.3032  0.0080  0.0378  0.0380  0.0367  0.03
Lushtak 2004   33  0.4664  0.0019  0.0627  0.3143  0.1028  0.18
Malcuzynski 1961   22  0.5017  0.0133  0.0632  0.2581  0.0339  0.09
Magaloff 1978   39  0.4440  0.0060  0.0652  0.0678  0.0359  0.04
Magin 1975   79  0.2756  0.0083  0.0376  0.0385  0.0372  0.03
Michalowski 1933   50  0.3991  0.0020  0.0621  0.3520  0.4015  0.37
Milkina 1970   54  0.3875  0.0065  0.0370  0.0379  0.0375  0.03
Mohovich 1999   46  0.4236  0.0054  0.0462  0.0456  0.0566  0.04
Moravec 1969   20  0.518  0.0414  0.1210  0.4920  0.3411  0.41
Morozova 2008   34  0.4641  0.0036  0.0630  0.2768  0.0437  0.10
Neighaus 1950   21  0.5118  0.0123  0.1125  0.3338  0.1624  0.23
Niedzielski 1931   64  0.3451  0.0057  0.0556  0.0541  0.1144  0.07
Ohlsson 1999   24  0.5022  0.0129  0.0636  0.2272  0.0440  0.09
Osinska 1989   3  0.617  0.057  0.185  0.5811  0.484  0.53
Pachmann 1927   87  0.1672  0.0089  0.0189  0.0186  0.0291  0.01
Paderewski 1930   11  0.5445  0.0011  0.1512  0.4614  0.438  0.44
Perlemuter 1992   57  0.3757  0.0053  0.0650  0.0679  0.0358  0.04
Pierdomenico 2008   55  0.3846  0.0061  0.0461  0.0481  0.0371  0.03
Poblocka 1999   13  0.5227  0.0017  0.0619  0.3550  0.0533  0.13
Rabcewiczowa 1932   9  0.5621  0.0110  0.138  0.5016  0.535  0.51
Rachmaninoff 1923   61  0.3558  0.0040  0.0642  0.1471  0.0443  0.07
Rangell 2001   51  0.3926  0.0041  0.0546  0.0870  0.0356  0.05
Richter 1976   56  0.3884  0.0066  0.0468  0.0474  0.0378  0.03
Rosen 1989   16  0.5214  0.0125  0.0623  0.3436  0.1821  0.25
Rosenthal 1930   17  0.5139  0.0028  0.0818  0.3623  0.4513  0.40
Rosenthal 1931   70  0.3287  0.0067  0.0466  0.0461  0.0461  0.04
Rosenthal 1931b   77  0.2969  0.0078  0.0375  0.0370  0.0384  0.03
Rosenthal 1931c   12  0.529  0.0227  0.0724  0.3420  0.3717  0.35
Rosenthal 1931d   74  0.3043  0.0079  0.0467  0.0474  0.0381  0.03
Rossi 2007   72  0.3111  0.0235  0.0537  0.217  0.4418  0.30
Rubinstein 1939   86  0.2065  0.0091  0.0191  0.0185  0.0386  0.02
Rubinstein 1952   78  0.2776  0.0086  0.0286  0.0276  0.0390  0.02
Rubinstein 1966   53  0.3873  0.0076  0.0372  0.0384  0.0380  0.03
Schilhawsky 1960   30  0.4779  0.0026  0.0626  0.3249  0.0632  0.14
Shebanova 2002   44  0.4242  0.0049  0.0558  0.0574  0.0462  0.04
Smith 1975   6  0.581  0.191  0.181  0.7113  0.451  0.57
Sokolov 2002   5  0.596  0.069  0.156  0.5731  0.319  0.42
Sztompka 1959   2  0.612  0.162  0.214  0.5814  0.456  0.51
Tomsic 1995   52  0.3990  0.0058  0.0464  0.0482  0.0377  0.03
Uninsky 1932   25  0.4919  0.0112  0.1513  0.4622  0.3016  0.37
Uninsky 1971   10  0.5512  0.026  0.1511  0.4829  0.3512  0.41
Wasowski 1980   36  0.4513  0.0138  0.0735  0.2330  0.2522  0.24
Zak 1937   63  0.3570  0.0075  0.0373  0.0382  0.0374  0.03
Zak 1951   62  0.3571  0.0072  0.0463  0.0488  0.0276  0.03
Average   1  0.635  0.084  0.202  0.6471  0.0430  0.16
Random 1   89  0.0530  0.0090  0.0190  0.0115  0.3849  0.06
Random 2   91  0.0038  0.0087  0.0187  0.0134  0.1963  0.04
Random 3   90  0.0366  0.0088  0.0188  0.0119  0.3550  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).