Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   6  0.5929  0.009  0.097  0.5228  0.3615  0.43
Anderszewski 2003   62  0.4362  0.0056  0.0560  0.0562  0.0472  0.04
Ashkenazy 1981   16  0.5416  0.0013  0.0911  0.5122  0.4213  0.46
Bacha 2000   77  0.3581  0.0072  0.0563  0.0566  0.0555  0.05
Badura 1965   20  0.5412  0.0119  0.1221  0.4214  0.4317  0.42
Barbosa 1983   42  0.4911  0.0145  0.0750  0.0733  0.2539  0.13
Biret 1990   46  0.4731  0.0055  0.0651  0.0679  0.0466  0.05
Blet 2003   21  0.5357  0.0044  0.0842  0.1623  0.3031  0.22
Block 1995   61  0.4345  0.0053  0.0561  0.0564  0.0474  0.04
Blumental 1952   38  0.5063  0.0027  0.0635  0.2422  0.2730  0.25
Boshniakovich 1969   17  0.5433  0.0028  0.0625  0.3533  0.2627  0.30
Brailowsky 1960   76  0.3687  0.0080  0.0383  0.0378  0.0379  0.03
Bunin 1987   27  0.5232  0.0037  0.0723  0.3716  0.4420  0.40
Bunin 1987b   31  0.5175  0.0038  0.1024  0.3717  0.4319  0.40
Chiu 1999   55  0.4569  0.0061  0.0478  0.0449  0.0658  0.05
Cohen 1997   87  0.1685  0.0085  0.0287  0.0259  0.0486  0.03
Cortot 1951   26  0.5271  0.0042  0.0936  0.249  0.5622  0.37
Csalog 1996   82  0.3168  0.0077  0.0566  0.0577  0.0371  0.04
Czerny 1949   5  0.6024  0.006  0.146  0.5715  0.507  0.53
Czerny 1990   3  0.6120  0.007  0.184  0.6717  0.446  0.54
Duchoud 2007   52  0.4642  0.0047  0.0567  0.0526  0.3540  0.13
Ezaki 2006   13  0.5578  0.0033  0.0630  0.2650  0.0641  0.12
Falvay 1989   75  0.3783  0.0078  0.0384  0.0382  0.0381  0.03
Farrell 1958   71  0.3972  0.0070  0.0473  0.0473  0.0383  0.03
Ferenczy 1958   58  0.4479  0.0041  0.0643  0.1329  0.2434  0.18
Fliere 1977   7  0.5822  0.0017  0.099  0.5148  0.0635  0.17
Fou 1978   56  0.4554  0.0067  0.0747  0.0777  0.0460  0.05
Francois 1956   64  0.4350  0.0065  0.0658  0.0674  0.0378  0.04
Friedman 1923   44  0.4870  0.0010  0.0818  0.444  0.628  0.52
Friedman 1923b   43  0.4840  0.008  0.1114  0.485  0.634  0.55
Friedman 1930   48  0.4752  0.0022  0.0822  0.409  0.5212  0.46
Garcia 2007   63  0.4377  0.0062  0.0474  0.0415  0.3845  0.12
Garcia 2007b   68  0.4251  0.0057  0.0655  0.0621  0.3338  0.14
Gierzod 1998   30  0.513  0.0214  0.1015  0.4740  0.3121  0.38
Gornostaeva 1994   51  0.4660  0.0066  0.0749  0.0770  0.0365  0.05
Groot 1988   57  0.4437  0.0068  0.0945  0.0986  0.0367  0.05
Harasiewicz 1955   4  0.608  0.013  0.193  0.6919  0.453  0.56
Hatto 1993   66  0.4267  0.0031  0.0934  0.2551  0.0646  0.12
Hatto 1997   65  0.4323  0.0030  0.0633  0.2551  0.0643  0.12
Horowitz 1949   32  0.5115  0.0040  0.0641  0.1625  0.4529  0.27
Indjic 1988   60  0.4355  0.0025  0.0732  0.2565  0.0547  0.11
Kapell 1951   12  0.5517  0.0015  0.1213  0.5025  0.3616  0.42
Kissin 1993   18  0.547  0.0134  0.0729  0.2654  0.0642  0.12
Kushner 1989   29  0.5125  0.0048  0.0559  0.0548  0.0852  0.06
Luisada 1991   36  0.506  0.0152  0.0652  0.0665  0.0556  0.05
Lushtak 2004   54  0.4536  0.0046  0.0748  0.0755  0.0554  0.06
Malcuzynski 1961   8  0.5710  0.014  0.175  0.6011  0.495  0.54
Magaloff 1978   67  0.4221  0.0059  0.0472  0.0480  0.0380  0.03
Magin 1975   33  0.5146  0.0029  0.0537  0.2243  0.0936  0.14
Michalowski 1933   19  0.5439  0.0011  0.0812  0.506  0.529  0.51
Milkina 1970   53  0.4543  0.0054  0.0653  0.0671  0.0461  0.05
Mohovich 1999   45  0.4884  0.0060  0.0476  0.0463  0.0476  0.04
Moravec 1969   41  0.495  0.0126  0.0544  0.1329  0.2433  0.18
Morozova 2008   9  0.5734  0.0018  0.1319  0.4435  0.1828  0.28
Neighaus 1950   34  0.5144  0.0032  0.0726  0.3274  0.0448  0.11
Niedzielski 1931   35  0.5126  0.0036  0.0738  0.2113  0.4926  0.32
Ohlsson 1999   50  0.4661  0.0024  0.0739  0.2144  0.1037  0.14
Osinska 1989   47  0.4782  0.0064  0.0562  0.0546  0.0751  0.06
Pachmann 1927   80  0.3356  0.0082  0.0471  0.0473  0.0470  0.04
Paderewski 1930   59  0.4441  0.0063  0.0470  0.0440  0.1150  0.07
Perlemuter 1992   25  0.5353  0.0043  0.0740  0.1931  0.2332  0.21
Pierdomenico 2008   74  0.3730  0.0075  0.0568  0.0556  0.0659  0.05
Poblocka 1999   15  0.5448  0.0016  0.1120  0.4427  0.3023  0.36
Rabcewiczowa 1932   22  0.5349  0.0035  0.0727  0.3019  0.3724  0.33
Rachmaninoff 1923   10  0.562  0.025  0.2010  0.5111  0.4811  0.49
Rangell 2001   72  0.3838  0.0073  0.0469  0.0463  0.0577  0.04
Richter 1976   23  0.5318  0.0039  0.0831  0.2617  0.4325  0.33
Rosen 1989   49  0.4728  0.0058  0.0656  0.0664  0.0564  0.05
Rosenthal 1930   69  0.4164  0.0071  0.0475  0.0453  0.0663  0.05
Rosenthal 1931   83  0.2766  0.0083  0.0380  0.0385  0.0384  0.03
Rosenthal 1931b   85  0.2674  0.0084  0.0381  0.0373  0.0388  0.03
Rosenthal 1931c   81  0.3288  0.0081  0.0382  0.0376  0.0389  0.03
Rosenthal 1931d   86  0.2586  0.0087  0.0479  0.0484  0.0387  0.03
Rossi 2007   78  0.3476  0.0076  0.0565  0.0550  0.0557  0.05
Rubinstein 1939   84  0.2647  0.0086  0.0386  0.0372  0.0482  0.03
Rubinstein 1952   79  0.3365  0.0079  0.0385  0.0372  0.0490  0.03
Rubinstein 1966   73  0.3873  0.0074  0.0564  0.0576  0.0473  0.04
Schilhawsky 1960   11  0.5558  0.0012  0.088  0.5216  0.5110  0.51
Shebanova 2002   24  0.5314  0.0123  0.0628  0.2966  0.0544  0.12
Smith 1975   40  0.4913  0.0149  0.0657  0.0672  0.0368  0.04
Sokolov 2002   28  0.5119  0.0020  0.0817  0.4522  0.3618  0.40
Sztompka 1959   2  0.654  0.022  0.442  0.692  0.582  0.63
Tomsic 1995   70  0.4180  0.0069  0.0477  0.0476  0.0469  0.04
Uninsky 1932   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Uninsky 1971   1  0.781  0.801  0.791  0.881  0.841  0.86
Wasowski 1980   14  0.549  0.0121  0.0916  0.4611  0.4514  0.45
Zak 1937   37  0.5035  0.0051  0.0846  0.0857  0.0553  0.06
Zak 1951   39  0.4927  0.0050  0.0654  0.0670  0.0462  0.05
Random 1   90  -0.0489  0.0090  0.0190  0.0133  0.1775  0.04
Random 2   88  -0.0159  0.0088  0.0288  0.0211  0.4149  0.09
Random 3   89  -0.0490  0.0089  0.0189  0.0141  0.0885  0.03

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).