Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   33  0.5170  0.0045  0.0650  0.0665  0.0471  0.05
Anderszewski 2003   34  0.5188  0.0031  0.0728  0.2734  0.1924  0.23
Ashkenazy 1981   42  0.4961  0.0047  0.0652  0.0684  0.0382  0.04
Bacha 2000   80  0.3666  0.0080  0.0651  0.0660  0.0565  0.05
Badura 1965   59  0.4728  0.0054  0.0649  0.0653  0.0662  0.06
Barbosa 1983   41  0.497  0.0315  0.1121  0.3218  0.4116  0.36
Biret 1990   10  0.568  0.033  0.133  0.5415  0.434  0.48
Blet 2003   30  0.5127  0.0038  0.0536  0.1622  0.3125  0.22
Block 1995   47  0.4941  0.0033  0.0637  0.1627  0.2627  0.20
Blumental 1952   67  0.4329  0.0064  0.0382  0.0360  0.0485  0.03
Boshniakovich 1969   12  0.5535  0.0022  0.0613  0.4424  0.3212  0.38
Brailowsky 1960   75  0.4247  0.0079  0.0560  0.0560  0.0566  0.05
Bunin 1987   69  0.4356  0.0071  0.0476  0.0444  0.1159  0.07
Bunin 1987b   71  0.4371  0.0070  0.0478  0.0441  0.1156  0.07
Chiu 1999   32  0.5111  0.0211  0.1115  0.4116  0.477  0.44
Cohen 1997   83  0.3342  0.0081  0.0561  0.0564  0.0483  0.04
Cortot 1951   49  0.4831  0.0053  0.0556  0.0518  0.4235  0.14
Csalog 1996   57  0.4721  0.0140  0.0542  0.1214  0.5022  0.24
Czerny 1949   25  0.5264  0.0032  0.0731  0.2253  0.0643  0.11
Czerny 1990   2  0.6113  0.016  0.129  0.5130  0.2715  0.37
Duchoud 2007   56  0.4737  0.0060  0.0384  0.0340  0.1558  0.07
Ezaki 2006   58  0.4784  0.0072  0.0465  0.0476  0.0475  0.04
Falvay 1989   46  0.4959  0.0066  0.0474  0.0460  0.0578  0.04
Farrell 1958   38  0.5043  0.0049  0.0745  0.0728  0.2538  0.13
Ferenczy 1958   70  0.4378  0.0073  0.0386  0.0341  0.1461  0.06
Fliere 1977   4  0.5910  0.028  0.156  0.5240  0.2117  0.33
Fou 1978   53  0.4851  0.0052  0.0559  0.0548  0.0668  0.05
Francois 1956   61  0.4579  0.0074  0.0464  0.0473  0.0387  0.03
Friedman 1923   78  0.3725  0.0077  0.0385  0.0340  0.1464  0.06
Friedman 1923b   77  0.3833  0.0076  0.0475  0.0437  0.1460  0.07
Friedman 1930   65  0.4554  0.0055  0.0554  0.0529  0.2940  0.12
Garcia 2007   76  0.3982  0.0059  0.0481  0.0423  0.2745  0.10
Garcia 2007b   68  0.4332  0.0048  0.0553  0.0511  0.4633  0.15
Gierzod 1998   50  0.4865  0.0041  0.0640  0.1557  0.0547  0.09
Gornostaeva 1994   19  0.5316  0.0143  0.0543  0.1246  0.0554  0.08
Groot 1988   18  0.5336  0.0030  0.0730  0.2641  0.1628  0.20
Harasiewicz 1955   28  0.5119  0.0125  0.0620  0.3251  0.0636  0.14
Hatto 1993   43  0.4963  0.0024  0.0817  0.4036  0.1523  0.24
Hatto 1997   37  0.5020  0.0123  0.0518  0.4029  0.2319  0.30
Horowitz 1949   11  0.5617  0.0121  0.0625  0.3013  0.569  0.41
Indjic 1988   35  0.5130  0.0016  0.1012  0.4428  0.2118  0.30
Kapell 1951   3  0.603  0.082  0.131  0.6312  0.442  0.53
Kissin 1993   21  0.5344  0.0035  0.0532  0.1964  0.0544  0.10
Kushner 1989   9  0.5762  0.0019  0.0716  0.4151  0.0632  0.16
Luisada 1991   6  0.585  0.057  0.124  0.5322  0.453  0.49
Lushtak 2004   48  0.4857  0.0036  0.0634  0.1854  0.0548  0.09
Malcuzynski 1961   27  0.5245  0.0034  0.0738  0.1569  0.0450  0.08
Magaloff 1978   51  0.4849  0.0063  0.0463  0.0446  0.0577  0.04
Magin 1975   23  0.5224  0.0037  0.0633  0.1944  0.0937  0.13
Michalowski 1933   73  0.4268  0.0067  0.0472  0.0455  0.0669  0.05
Milkina 1970   16  0.5414  0.0110  0.1114  0.4142  0.1520  0.25
Mohovich 1999   63  0.4567  0.0068  0.0470  0.0467  0.0481  0.04
Moravec 1969   26  0.5222  0.0018  0.0835  0.1731  0.2129  0.19
Morozova 2008   17  0.5426  0.0020  0.0823  0.3153  0.0539  0.12
Neighaus 1950   22  0.5234  0.0014  0.1319  0.3843  0.1326  0.22
Niedzielski 1931   24  0.5215  0.0127  0.0622  0.319  0.548  0.41
Ohlsson 1999   8  0.576  0.049  0.157  0.5232  0.3011  0.39
Osinska 1989   1  0.621  0.331  0.332  0.6116  0.481  0.54
Pachmann 1927   81  0.3580  0.0082  0.0558  0.0543  0.1352  0.08
Paderewski 1930   60  0.4560  0.0057  0.0479  0.0437  0.1551  0.08
Perlemuter 1992   29  0.5185  0.0044  0.0544  0.1139  0.1734  0.14
Pierdomenico 2008   74  0.4255  0.0058  0.0473  0.0451  0.0767  0.05
Poblocka 1999   13  0.5518  0.0112  0.1110  0.4828  0.2913  0.37
Rabcewiczowa 1932   55  0.4869  0.0056  0.0467  0.0439  0.1455  0.07
Rachmaninoff 1923   31  0.5112  0.0217  0.0726  0.2842  0.1031  0.17
Rangell 2001   64  0.4523  0.0046  0.0557  0.0538  0.1549  0.09
Richter 1976   15  0.5440  0.0029  0.0624  0.3014  0.4514  0.37
Rosen 1989   36  0.5075  0.0050  0.0647  0.0654  0.0663  0.06
Rosenthal 1930   82  0.3458  0.0083  0.0746  0.0782  0.0372  0.05
Rosenthal 1931   86  0.2076  0.0085  0.0477  0.0467  0.0384  0.03
Rosenthal 1931b   87  0.1887  0.0087  0.0480  0.0468  0.0386  0.03
Rosenthal 1931c   84  0.2973  0.0084  0.0648  0.0661  0.0473  0.05
Rosenthal 1931d   85  0.2090  0.0086  0.0287  0.0271  0.0389  0.02
Rossi 2007   79  0.3638  0.0078  0.0471  0.0423  0.2841  0.11
Rubinstein 1939   72  0.4372  0.0065  0.0468  0.0421  0.3242  0.11
Rubinstein 1952   66  0.4448  0.0075  0.0562  0.0559  0.0574  0.05
Rubinstein 1966   44  0.4974  0.0061  0.0383  0.0347  0.0870  0.05
Schilhawsky 1960   20  0.5353  0.0028  0.0627  0.2737  0.2421  0.25
Shebanova 2002   7  0.582  0.104  0.158  0.5226  0.405  0.46
Smith 1975   52  0.4881  0.0051  0.0555  0.0583  0.0379  0.04
Sokolov 2002   54  0.4846  0.0062  0.0469  0.0454  0.0576  0.04
Sztompka 1959   5  0.594  0.085  0.125  0.5223  0.3110  0.40
Tomsic 1995   62  0.4550  0.0069  0.0466  0.0457  0.0580  0.04
Uninsky 1932   14  0.549  0.0213  0.1111  0.4516  0.466  0.45
Uninsky 1971   40  0.4939  0.0026  0.0629  0.2642  0.1230  0.18
Wasowski 1980   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Zak 1937   39  0.5077  0.0039  0.0539  0.1555  0.0546  0.09
Zak 1951   45  0.4952  0.0042  0.0641  0.1474  0.0457  0.07
Random 1   89  -0.0789  0.0089  0.0289  0.0261  0.0388  0.02
Random 2   90  -0.0886  0.0090  0.0190  0.0190  0.0190  0.01
Random 3   88  0.0083  0.0088  0.0288  0.0221  0.2953  0.08

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).