Richter 1976

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   54  0.4385  0.0074  0.0364  0.0372  0.0372  0.03
Anderszewski 2003   48  0.4426  0.0118  0.0725  0.3127  0.2722  0.29
Ashkenazy 1981   21  0.5318  0.0127  0.0914  0.3949  0.0536  0.14
Bacha 2000   73  0.3386  0.0081  0.0381  0.0357  0.0466  0.03
Badura 1965   70  0.3527  0.0151  0.0550  0.0544  0.1246  0.08
Barbosa 1983   57  0.4261  0.0056  0.0366  0.0370  0.0468  0.03
Biret 1990   74  0.3262  0.0080  0.0288  0.0280  0.0390  0.02
Blet 2003   22  0.5341  0.0043  0.0539  0.1540  0.1634  0.15
Block 1995   10  0.5811  0.0320  0.0622  0.3319  0.3614  0.34
Blumental 1952   85  0.1769  0.0086  0.0380  0.0386  0.0287  0.02
Boshniakovich 1969   32  0.4847  0.0044  0.0545  0.1146  0.0550  0.07
Brailowsky 1960   39  0.4659  0.0041  0.0643  0.1353  0.0543  0.08
Bunin 1987   26  0.5014  0.0111  0.088  0.4230  0.2911  0.35
Bunin 1987b   27  0.5029  0.0012  0.109  0.4130  0.2912  0.34
Chiu 1999   42  0.4630  0.0045  0.0644  0.1240  0.1833  0.15
Cohen 1997   69  0.3663  0.0062  0.0458  0.0449  0.0656  0.05
Cortot 1951   65  0.3887  0.0075  0.0374  0.0368  0.0478  0.03
Csalog 1996   37  0.4825  0.0130  0.0634  0.1916  0.4919  0.31
Czerny 1949   80  0.2980  0.0084  0.0365  0.0387  0.0285  0.02
Czerny 1990   9  0.5815  0.0122  0.1113  0.3928  0.2420  0.31
Duchoud 2007   33  0.4856  0.0039  0.0537  0.1654  0.0542  0.09
Ezaki 2006   49  0.4383  0.0059  0.0373  0.0383  0.0282  0.02
Falvay 1989   19  0.5443  0.0032  0.0631  0.2340  0.1231  0.17
Farrell 1958   75  0.3164  0.0082  0.0382  0.0387  0.0284  0.02
Ferenczy 1958   66  0.3788  0.0067  0.0384  0.0346  0.0755  0.05
Fliere 1977   2  0.646  0.063  0.131  0.5923  0.392  0.48
Fou 1978   23  0.5335  0.0029  0.0829  0.2641  0.1826  0.22
Francois 1956   64  0.3860  0.0076  0.0386  0.0380  0.0379  0.03
Friedman 1923   88  0.1123  0.0188  0.0372  0.0368  0.0481  0.03
Friedman 1923b   87  0.1146  0.0087  0.0385  0.0372  0.0474  0.03
Friedman 1930   82  0.2613  0.0258  0.0368  0.0378  0.0370  0.03
Garcia 2007   67  0.3736  0.0049  0.0746  0.0710  0.6227  0.21
Garcia 2007b   86  0.1632  0.0083  0.0377  0.0353  0.0480  0.03
Gierzod 1998   71  0.3466  0.0077  0.0371  0.0381  0.0286  0.02
Gornostaeva 1994   50  0.4358  0.0072  0.0455  0.0486  0.0275  0.03
Groot 1988   3  0.6157  0.009  0.117  0.4231  0.2715  0.34
Harasiewicz 1955   17  0.557  0.064  0.125  0.4518  0.366  0.40
Hatto 1993   63  0.3819  0.0135  0.0533  0.2033  0.2029  0.20
Hatto 1997   77  0.3084  0.0054  0.0462  0.0474  0.0371  0.03
Horowitz 1949   28  0.5012  0.0217  0.0919  0.3617  0.369  0.36
Indjic 1988   68  0.3665  0.0036  0.0538  0.1643  0.1335  0.14
Kapell 1951   15  0.551  0.161  0.1610  0.4133  0.3010  0.35
Kissin 1993   7  0.6010  0.0313  0.0818  0.3729  0.3113  0.34
Kushner 1989   4  0.6116  0.0121  0.0824  0.3326  0.3018  0.31
Luisada 1991   52  0.4345  0.0065  0.0461  0.0472  0.0458  0.04
Lushtak 2004   24  0.5271  0.0026  0.0716  0.3740  0.1525  0.24
Malcuzynski 1961   13  0.5650  0.0023  0.0727  0.2951  0.0537  0.12
Magaloff 1978   5  0.6034  0.008  0.1017  0.3725  0.2717  0.32
Magin 1975   18  0.555  0.0610  0.096  0.4310  0.484  0.45
Michalowski 1933   79  0.3037  0.0057  0.0369  0.0355  0.0560  0.04
Milkina 1970   47  0.4451  0.0053  0.0549  0.0548  0.0653  0.05
Mohovich 1999   20  0.5352  0.0033  0.0730  0.2555  0.0539  0.11
Moravec 1969   44  0.4577  0.0071  0.0460  0.0471  0.0457  0.04
Morozova 2008   30  0.4954  0.0038  0.0532  0.2064  0.0441  0.09
Neighaus 1950   59  0.4048  0.0061  0.0551  0.0585  0.0363  0.04
Niedzielski 1931   38  0.4720  0.0125  0.0826  0.315  0.508  0.39
Ohlsson 1999   40  0.4622  0.0150  0.0747  0.0775  0.0354  0.05
Osinska 1989   45  0.4438  0.0070  0.0370  0.0370  0.0467  0.03
Pachmann 1927   29  0.5017  0.0128  0.0820  0.3419  0.475  0.40
Paderewski 1930   35  0.4840  0.0037  0.0535  0.1746  0.0738  0.11
Perlemuter 1992   6  0.603  0.105  0.134  0.4612  0.493  0.47
Pierdomenico 2008   31  0.4949  0.0040  0.0736  0.1727  0.2328  0.20
Poblocka 1999   16  0.5555  0.0024  0.0912  0.4034  0.2121  0.29
Rabcewiczowa 1932   83  0.2578  0.0085  0.0287  0.0285  0.0283  0.02
Rachmaninoff 1923   58  0.4172  0.0031  0.0640  0.1564  0.0444  0.08
Rangell 2001   60  0.4042  0.0064  0.0463  0.0472  0.0376  0.03
Richter 1976   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Rosen 1989   51  0.4328  0.0069  0.0383  0.0363  0.0473  0.03
Rosenthal 1930   62  0.3981  0.0055  0.0457  0.0440  0.1449  0.07
Rosenthal 1931   72  0.3367  0.0066  0.0378  0.0352  0.0561  0.04
Rosenthal 1931b   81  0.2975  0.0078  0.0379  0.0350  0.0564  0.04
Rosenthal 1931c   61  0.4079  0.0063  0.0367  0.0349  0.0565  0.04
Rosenthal 1931d   78  0.3076  0.0079  0.0375  0.0370  0.0377  0.03
Rossi 2007   76  0.3189  0.0073  0.0459  0.0431  0.2040  0.09
Rubinstein 1939   84  0.238  0.066  0.1142  0.1466  0.0448  0.07
Rubinstein 1952   41  0.4639  0.0052  0.0552  0.0543  0.1247  0.08
Rubinstein 1966   56  0.4253  0.0068  0.0376  0.0371  0.0469  0.03
Schilhawsky 1960   36  0.4844  0.0019  0.0921  0.3425  0.3316  0.33
Shebanova 2002   14  0.564  0.0714  0.0923  0.3340  0.2224  0.27
Smith 1975   43  0.4573  0.0060  0.0456  0.0461  0.0459  0.04
Sokolov 2002   11  0.589  0.057  0.0911  0.4019  0.397  0.39
Sztompka 1959   25  0.5021  0.0142  0.0541  0.1570  0.0445  0.08
Tomsic 1995   12  0.5724  0.0115  0.0715  0.3931  0.2023  0.28
Uninsky 1932   53  0.4333  0.0046  0.0454  0.0450  0.0562  0.04
Uninsky 1971   55  0.4382  0.0047  0.0553  0.0549  0.0751  0.06
Wasowski 1980   8  0.5831  0.0016  0.093  0.512  0.641  0.57
Zak 1937   46  0.4490  0.0048  0.0648  0.0656  0.0552  0.05
Zak 1951   34  0.4868  0.0034  0.0728  0.2844  0.1330  0.19
Average   1  0.672  0.112  0.122  0.5758  0.0532  0.17
Random 1   90  -0.0791  0.0090  0.0190  0.0161  0.0388  0.02
Random 2   91  -0.0870  0.0091  0.0191  0.0187  0.0291  0.01
Random 3   89  0.0074  0.0089  0.0189  0.0160  0.0389  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).