Francois 1956

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   18  0.5719  0.008  0.1211  0.5539  0.069  0.18
Ashkenazy 1981   23  0.5722  0.0028  0.1023  0.2959  0.0525  0.12
Beliavsky 2004   29  0.5454  0.0037  0.0640  0.0652  0.0546  0.05
BenOr 1989   5  0.626  0.016  0.154  0.6856  0.0511  0.18
Biret 1990   60  0.4633  0.0060  0.0550  0.0555  0.0653  0.05
Blet 2003   14  0.5816  0.005  0.126  0.6152  0.0513  0.17
Block 1995   56  0.4927  0.0045  0.0737  0.0755  0.0451  0.05
Brailowsky 1960   26  0.5557  0.0027  0.0821  0.3462  0.0420  0.12
Chiu 1999   49  0.5128  0.0043  0.0639  0.0658  0.0442  0.05
Clidat 1994   27  0.5562  0.0018  0.1219  0.4252  0.0519  0.14
Cohen 1997   59  0.4639  0.0058  0.0362  0.0345  0.0560  0.04
Coop 1987   52  0.5137  0.0044  0.0738  0.0761  0.0537  0.06
Cortot 1951   44  0.5255  0.0051  0.0555  0.0560  0.0462  0.04
Czerny 1949   53  0.5053  0.0057  0.0458  0.0454  0.0647  0.05
Czerny 1949b   36  0.5424  0.0050  0.0642  0.0659  0.0545  0.05
Ezaki 2006   38  0.5359  0.0048  0.0646  0.0661  0.0539  0.05
Falvay 1989   8  0.617  0.014  0.233  0.6947  0.074  0.22
Ferenczy 1958   37  0.5356  0.0038  0.0733  0.0751  0.0538  0.06
Fiorentino 1962   31  0.5443  0.0032  0.0632  0.1253  0.0533  0.08
Fliere 1977   11  0.5932  0.0015  0.1215  0.5150  0.0612  0.17
Fou 1978   39  0.5342  0.0026  0.0727  0.2062  0.0430  0.09
Francois 1956   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Hatto 1997   9  0.605  0.027  0.165  0.6560  0.058  0.18
Horowitz 1971   24  0.5734  0.0017  0.1117  0.4859  0.0326  0.12
Horowitz 1985   61  0.4360  0.0063  0.0648  0.0663  0.0441  0.05
Indjic 2001   10  0.6012  0.0112  0.137  0.6063  0.0418  0.15
Kapell 1951   41  0.5218  0.0040  0.0641  0.0663  0.0356  0.04
Kiepura 1999   35  0.5458  0.0056  0.0553  0.0541  0.0640  0.05
Kilenyi 1937   54  0.5030  0.0055  0.0456  0.0459  0.0458  0.04
Kissin 1993   48  0.5126  0.0024  0.0828  0.1948  0.0628  0.11
Kitain 1937   63  0.3963  0.0062  0.0554  0.0551  0.0461  0.04
Kushner 1990   43  0.5250  0.0031  0.0731  0.1445  0.0631  0.09
Levy 1951   47  0.5152  0.0035  0.0644  0.0654  0.0543  0.05
Luisada 1990   50  0.5147  0.0059  0.0457  0.0455  0.0650  0.05
Lushtak 2004   15  0.5836  0.0019  0.1218  0.4654  0.0517  0.15
Lympany 1968   22  0.5735  0.0023  0.0822  0.3060  0.0427  0.11
Magaloff 1977   28  0.5544  0.0029  0.0730  0.1557  0.0532  0.09
Magaloff 1977b   32  0.5441  0.0042  0.0645  0.0657  0.0452  0.05
Magin 1975   42  0.5229  0.0053  0.0459  0.0461  0.0455  0.04
Milkina 1970   4  0.6210  0.013  0.238  0.5932  0.132  0.28
Mohovich 1999   3  0.6214  0.0110  0.1313  0.5448  0.0515  0.16
Nadelmann 1956   25  0.5649  0.0025  0.0925  0.2346  0.0622  0.12
Ohlsson 1999   46  0.518  0.0134  0.0551  0.0556  0.0457  0.04
Olejniczac 1990   33  0.5461  0.0041  0.0643  0.0657  0.0548  0.05
Olejniczak 1991   58  0.4825  0.0054  0.0461  0.0460  0.0554  0.04
Osinska 1989   6  0.619  0.0113  0.1110  0.5652  0.067  0.18
Paderewski 1912   40  0.5223  0.0036  0.0552  0.0555  0.0549  0.05
Perahia 1994   21  0.573  0.0322  0.1326  0.2331  0.1410  0.18
Perlemuter 1986   2  0.661  0.481  0.482  0.7913  0.531  0.65
Poblocka 1999   30  0.5438  0.0049  0.0735  0.0748  0.0635  0.06
Rangell 2001   55  0.4945  0.0052  0.0363  0.0361  0.0465  0.03
Risler 1920   62  0.4217  0.0061  0.0460  0.0463  0.0364  0.03
Rosen 1989   17  0.5813  0.0111  0.1214  0.5231  0.153  0.28
Rubinstein 1939   45  0.5151  0.0039  0.0647  0.0649  0.0444  0.05
Rubinstein 1952   34  0.5448  0.0033  0.0549  0.0563  0.0463  0.04
Rubinstein 1966   19  0.5731  0.0016  0.1216  0.4945  0.0514  0.16
Rummel 1943   13  0.5920  0.0021  0.0924  0.2748  0.0524  0.12
Shebanova 2002   12  0.594  0.0314  0.1112  0.5444  0.076  0.19
Smith 1975   7  0.6121  0.009  0.159  0.5763  0.0416  0.15
Szpilman 1948   51  0.5115  0.0047  0.0736  0.0752  0.0634  0.06
Uninsky 1971   20  0.5746  0.0020  0.1120  0.3660  0.0423  0.12
Wasowski 1980   16  0.5840  0.0030  0.0729  0.1650  0.0629  0.10
Weissenberg 1971   57  0.4911  0.0146  0.0734  0.0751  0.0636  0.06
Average   1  0.672  0.312  0.601  0.9060  0.055  0.21
Random 1    64  0.0064  0.0064  0.0364  0.032  0.5021  0.12
Random 2   65  -0.0265  0.0065  0.0265  0.0259  0.0266  0.02
Random 3   66  -0.0466  0.0066  0.0166  0.0124  0.2059  0.04

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).