Czerny 1949

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   49  0.6443  0.0046  0.0745  0.0728  0.2043  0.12
Ashkenazy 1981   21  0.7256  0.0027  0.1127  0.3236  0.0935  0.17
Beliavsky 2004   22  0.7110  0.0035  0.1234  0.126  0.4929  0.24
BenOr 1989   18  0.7357  0.0021  0.1123  0.4039  0.0833  0.18
Biret 1990   38  0.6744  0.0032  0.0932  0.1730  0.1640  0.16
Blet 2003   54  0.6165  0.0052  0.0840  0.0848  0.0649  0.07
Block 1995   41  0.6623  0.0040  0.0747  0.0734  0.1047  0.08
Brailowsky 1960   39  0.6714  0.0045  0.0746  0.0722  0.4134  0.17
Chiu 1999   32  0.6827  0.0025  0.1026  0.3227  0.3228  0.32
Clidat 1994   15  0.738  0.0124  0.1124  0.367  0.5718  0.45
Cohen 1997   62  0.5060  0.0062  0.0463  0.0459  0.0463  0.04
Coop 1987   10  0.7411  0.009  0.2911  0.6022  0.4314  0.51
Cortot 1951   44  0.6534  0.0048  0.0652  0.0611  0.4836  0.17
Czerny 1949   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Czerny 1949b   1  0.861  0.641  0.631  0.901  0.911  0.90
Ezaki 2006   5  0.7720  0.006  0.345  0.7211  0.615  0.66
Falvay 1989   25  0.7145  0.0026  0.1425  0.3427  0.3226  0.33
Ferenczy 1958   55  0.6028  0.0053  0.0841  0.0824  0.3138  0.16
Fiorentino 1962   16  0.7363  0.0016  0.1214  0.5619  0.4913  0.52
Fliere 1977   17  0.7348  0.0022  0.1218  0.4627  0.3420  0.40
Fou 1978   14  0.7336  0.0015  0.1315  0.5322  0.4116  0.47
Francois 1956   61  0.5050  0.0063  0.0654  0.0658  0.0459  0.05
Hatto 1997   58  0.5858  0.0058  0.0556  0.0545  0.0656  0.05
Horowitz 1971   57  0.5949  0.0056  0.0560  0.0562  0.0364  0.04
Horowitz 1985   60  0.5525  0.0059  0.0559  0.0535  0.1048  0.07
Indjic 2001   56  0.6061  0.0055  0.0557  0.0562  0.0462  0.04
Kapell 1951   26  0.7033  0.0019  0.1016  0.5027  0.3022  0.39
Kiepura 1999   31  0.6939  0.0044  0.0938  0.0925  0.3631  0.18
Kilenyi 1937   8  0.7435  0.008  0.238  0.6718  0.547  0.60
Kissin 1993   7  0.754  0.035  0.307  0.6810  0.498  0.58
Kitain 1937   63  0.477  0.0161  0.0461  0.0436  0.0954  0.06
Kushner 1990   45  0.6521  0.0041  0.0937  0.0923  0.3532  0.18
Levy 1951   35  0.6842  0.0029  0.1028  0.2316  0.5125  0.34
Luisada 1990   11  0.7417  0.0023  0.1021  0.4218  0.5017  0.46
Lushtak 2004   40  0.6632  0.0043  0.0743  0.0750  0.0652  0.06
Lympany 1968   46  0.6562  0.0047  0.0649  0.0640  0.0650  0.06
Magaloff 1977   29  0.6951  0.0033  0.1135  0.1131  0.2439  0.16
Magaloff 1977b   34  0.6864  0.0036  0.1233  0.1234  0.1145  0.11
Magin 1975   6  0.779  0.007  0.276  0.7115  0.634  0.67
Milkina 1970   48  0.6540  0.0051  0.0650  0.0645  0.0651  0.06
Mohovich 1999   37  0.6830  0.0037  0.0742  0.0745  0.0553  0.06
Nadelmann 1956   36  0.6815  0.0034  0.1036  0.1025  0.2441  0.15
Ohlsson 1999   43  0.6537  0.0039  0.0744  0.0730  0.2242  0.12
Olejniczac 1990   9  0.7438  0.0013  0.129  0.6120  0.519  0.56
Olejniczak 1991   13  0.7429  0.0014  0.1910  0.6119  0.4911  0.55
Osinska 1989   4  0.793  0.073  0.383  0.777  0.603  0.68
Paderewski 1912   27  0.7013  0.0018  0.0919  0.463  0.6112  0.53
Perahia 1994   59  0.5755  0.0060  0.0653  0.0646  0.0557  0.05
Perlemuter 1986   53  0.6259  0.0057  0.0462  0.0455  0.0560  0.04
Poblocka 1999   3  0.806  0.014  0.394  0.768  0.662  0.71
Rangell 2001   24  0.7146  0.0020  0.1020  0.4523  0.3521  0.40
Risler 1920   42  0.6622  0.0030  0.0729  0.2111  0.5424  0.34
Rosen 1989   52  0.6224  0.0054  0.0555  0.0553  0.0558  0.05
Rubinstein 1939   47  0.655  0.0142  0.0748  0.0718  0.3737  0.16
Rubinstein 1952   33  0.6841  0.0038  0.0939  0.0931  0.1346  0.11
Rubinstein 1966   51  0.6352  0.0049  0.0558  0.0539  0.0555  0.05
Rummel 1943   50  0.6431  0.0050  0.0651  0.0632  0.1944  0.11
Shebanova 2002   30  0.6916  0.0031  0.0831  0.1924  0.2730  0.23
Smith 1975   12  0.7426  0.0012  0.1113  0.596  0.5110  0.55
Szpilman 1948   19  0.7218  0.0010  0.1512  0.594  0.676  0.63
Uninsky 1971   23  0.7119  0.0011  0.1122  0.4018  0.4319  0.41
Wasowski 1980   20  0.7212  0.0028  0.0930  0.2112  0.4827  0.32
Weissenberg 1971   28  0.6953  0.0017  0.0917  0.4628  0.2823  0.36
Average   2  0.832  0.172  0.662  0.8527  0.3115  0.51
Random 1    66  -0.0347  0.0065  0.0265  0.0240  0.0465  0.03
Random 2   64  0.0066  0.0064  0.0364  0.0342  0.0561  0.04
Random 3   65  -0.0354  0.0066  0.0166  0.0137  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).