Lushtak 2004

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   12  0.6853  0.0035  0.0728  0.2334  0.2634  0.24
Anderszewski 2003   55  0.5755  0.0045  0.0558  0.0531  0.1761  0.09
Ashkenazy 1981   3  0.7214  0.0116  0.086  0.4516  0.459  0.45
Bacha 2000   63  0.5479  0.0067  0.0373  0.0350  0.0673  0.04
Badura 1965   47  0.6024  0.0055  0.0464  0.0425  0.3553  0.12
Barbosa 1983   15  0.6742  0.0024  0.0722  0.284  0.6010  0.41
Biret 1990   22  0.664  0.105  0.137  0.455  0.496  0.47
Blet 2003   8  0.7030  0.0022  0.0818  0.335  0.4812  0.40
Block 1995   76  0.4361  0.0077  0.0383  0.0372  0.0386  0.03
Blumental 1952   52  0.5865  0.0061  0.0645  0.0620  0.2256  0.11
Boshniakovich 1969   45  0.6026  0.0056  0.0460  0.0446  0.0769  0.05
Brailowsky 1960   46  0.6058  0.0052  0.0650  0.0636  0.2254  0.11
Bunin 1987   31  0.6488  0.0032  0.0632  0.204  0.5424  0.33
Bunin 1987b   36  0.6369  0.0033  0.0633  0.205  0.5423  0.33
Chiu 1999   14  0.6745  0.0049  0.0554  0.0517  0.4245  0.14
Cohen 1997   65  0.5343  0.0072  0.0372  0.039  0.4157  0.11
Cortot 1951   50  0.5916  0.0141  0.0540  0.1322  0.3139  0.20
Csalog 1996   73  0.4562  0.0062  0.0556  0.0522  0.3550  0.13
Czerny 1949   53  0.5887  0.0060  0.0552  0.0534  0.1763  0.09
Czerny 1990   27  0.6674  0.0038  0.0535  0.1732  0.1842  0.17
Duchoud 2007   51  0.5863  0.0048  0.0646  0.0611  0.4044  0.15
Ezaki 2006   1  0.748  0.0511  0.0712  0.4017  0.3814  0.39
Falvay 1989   26  0.6620  0.019  0.1120  0.2911  0.5216  0.39
Farrell 1958   17  0.6717  0.0130  0.0631  0.209  0.4229  0.29
Ferenczy 1958   39  0.6259  0.0054  0.0559  0.0512  0.3651  0.13
Fliere 1977   4  0.7121  0.0115  0.072  0.4924  0.3115  0.39
Fou 1978   9  0.7023  0.0113  0.0717  0.3422  0.3620  0.35
Francois 1956   49  0.5939  0.0031  0.0834  0.1921  0.3731  0.27
Friedman 1923   80  0.4280  0.0087  0.0467  0.0464  0.0581  0.04
Friedman 1923b   77  0.4334  0.0086  0.0461  0.0447  0.0770  0.05
Friedman 1930   66  0.5351  0.0066  0.0466  0.0433  0.2459  0.10
Garcia 2007   60  0.5575  0.0063  0.0649  0.0625  0.3149  0.14
Garcia 2007b   74  0.4466  0.0079  0.0381  0.0358  0.0580  0.04
Gierzod 1998   35  0.6318  0.0139  0.0541  0.1239  0.1648  0.14
Gornostaeva 1994   69  0.5081  0.0070  0.0469  0.0455  0.0578  0.04
Groot 1988   28  0.6556  0.0019  0.0819  0.319  0.5311  0.41
Harasiewicz 1955   16  0.6715  0.0120  0.0714  0.3625  0.3321  0.34
Hatto 1993   40  0.6273  0.0037  0.0542  0.1017  0.3241  0.18
Hatto 1997   20  0.6738  0.0026  0.0823  0.2514  0.3927  0.31
Horowitz 1949   67  0.5086  0.0075  0.0380  0.0373  0.0385  0.03
Indjic 1988   32  0.6449  0.0034  0.0637  0.1417  0.3636  0.22
Kapell 1951   37  0.636  0.064  0.114  0.468  0.467  0.46
Kissin 1993   29  0.6550  0.0051  0.0551  0.0545  0.0668  0.05
Kushner 1989   33  0.6428  0.0028  0.0625  0.2422  0.3630  0.29
Luisada 1991   21  0.6637  0.0025  0.0726  0.2433  0.2335  0.23
Lushtak 2004   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Malcuzynski 1961   72  0.4854  0.0076  0.0384  0.0384  0.0384  0.03
Magaloff 1978   44  0.607  0.067  0.1029  0.2224  0.3132  0.26
Magin 1975   68  0.5052  0.0071  0.0370  0.0348  0.0574  0.04
Michalowski 1933   81  0.4289  0.0074  0.0286  0.0250  0.0775  0.04
Milkina 1970   64  0.5448  0.0069  0.0378  0.0367  0.0483  0.03
Mohovich 1999   11  0.695  0.066  0.093  0.4710  0.533  0.50
Moravec 1969   78  0.4370  0.0082  0.0287  0.0282  0.0388  0.02
Morozova 2008   10  0.6919  0.0123  0.0921  0.2813  0.3426  0.31
Neighaus 1950   6  0.7110  0.0412  0.079  0.4215  0.3518  0.38
Niedzielski 1931   79  0.4229  0.0080  0.0376  0.0381  0.0382  0.03
Ohlsson 1999   13  0.6836  0.0017  0.0810  0.4121  0.3817  0.39
Osinska 1989   41  0.6127  0.0046  0.0557  0.0535  0.1860  0.09
Pachmann 1927   48  0.6022  0.0129  0.0638  0.147  0.5033  0.26
Paderewski 1930   43  0.6141  0.0050  0.0553  0.058  0.3947  0.14
Perlemuter 1992   2  0.7312  0.0310  0.085  0.463  0.534  0.49
Pierdomenico 2008   71  0.4971  0.0065  0.0468  0.0430  0.3452  0.12
Poblocka 1999   34  0.6413  0.0321  0.0816  0.3415  0.3719  0.35
Rabcewiczowa 1932   54  0.5832  0.0044  0.0444  0.0912  0.4337  0.20
Rachmaninoff 1923   42  0.6172  0.0047  0.0647  0.0622  0.3146  0.14
Rangell 2001   84  0.3625  0.0078  0.0382  0.0342  0.1071  0.05
Richter 1976   59  0.5546  0.0057  0.0463  0.0428  0.2758  0.10
Rosen 1989   58  0.5668  0.0064  0.0462  0.0450  0.0577  0.04
Rosenthal 1930   75  0.4390  0.0068  0.0374  0.0331  0.2266  0.08
Rosenthal 1931   85  0.3483  0.0083  0.0285  0.0241  0.1076  0.04
Rosenthal 1931b   86  0.3476  0.0084  0.0377  0.0343  0.0872  0.05
Rosenthal 1931c   82  0.4277  0.0081  0.0375  0.0331  0.2564  0.09
Rosenthal 1931d   87  0.3367  0.0073  0.0379  0.0358  0.0579  0.04
Rossi 2007   83  0.4133  0.0085  0.0371  0.0344  0.0967  0.05
Rubinstein 1939   70  0.4985  0.0053  0.0465  0.0419  0.3355  0.11
Rubinstein 1952   56  0.571  0.121  0.1224  0.2517  0.4722  0.34
Rubinstein 1966   30  0.6564  0.0027  0.0730  0.2017  0.4428  0.30
Schilhawsky 1960   18  0.673  0.103  0.1015  0.3513  0.4513  0.40
Shebanova 2002   25  0.669  0.0540  0.0636  0.1527  0.2838  0.20
Smith 1975   23  0.6631  0.0018  0.0911  0.416  0.535  0.47
Sokolov 2002   38  0.6347  0.0036  0.0627  0.2412  0.4425  0.32
Sztompka 1959   24  0.6657  0.0042  0.0539  0.1332  0.2740  0.19
Tomsic 1995   19  0.6711  0.038  0.1313  0.393  0.702  0.52
Uninsky 1932   62  0.5460  0.0058  0.0555  0.0541  0.1562  0.09
Uninsky 1971   61  0.5435  0.0043  0.0543  0.0931  0.3043  0.16
Wasowski 1980   57  0.5644  0.0059  0.0648  0.0639  0.1165  0.08
Zak 1937   7  0.7140  0.0014  0.088  0.438  0.508  0.46
Zak 1951   5  0.712  0.102  0.111  0.536  0.531  0.53
Random 1   90  -0.1882  0.0090  0.0190  0.0164  0.0390  0.02
Random 2   89  -0.1378  0.0089  0.0289  0.0269  0.0389  0.02
Random 3   88  -0.0384  0.0088  0.0288  0.0250  0.0587  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).