Francois 1956

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   3  0.762  0.112  0.213  0.6510  0.475  0.55
Anderszewski 2003   59  0.5218  0.0158  0.0548  0.0563  0.0367  0.04
Ashkenazy 1981   67  0.4954  0.0047  0.0547  0.0557  0.0472  0.04
Bacha 2000   53  0.5360  0.0059  0.0459  0.0464  0.0563  0.04
Badura 1965   61  0.5150  0.0067  0.0368  0.0354  0.0571  0.04
Barbosa 1983   47  0.5657  0.0043  0.0543  0.1117  0.3333  0.19
Biret 1990   24  0.6513  0.0115  0.0816  0.4429  0.2522  0.33
Blet 2003   26  0.6464  0.0038  0.0732  0.2734  0.2031  0.23
Block 1995   69  0.4842  0.0082  0.0287  0.0281  0.0390  0.02
Blumental 1952   78  0.4337  0.0041  0.0644  0.1143  0.0945  0.10
Boshniakovich 1969   54  0.5388  0.0070  0.0377  0.0372  0.0486  0.03
Brailowsky 1960   45  0.5677  0.0072  0.0371  0.0362  0.0565  0.04
Bunin 1987   63  0.5061  0.0073  0.0383  0.0352  0.0573  0.04
Bunin 1987b   65  0.4969  0.0074  0.0556  0.0559  0.0557  0.05
Chiu 1999   72  0.4774  0.0065  0.0370  0.0355  0.0479  0.03
Cohen 1997   85  0.3134  0.0086  0.0378  0.0346  0.0761  0.05
Cortot 1951   55  0.5358  0.0068  0.0375  0.0349  0.0676  0.04
Csalog 1996   64  0.5035  0.0049  0.0460  0.0428  0.2644  0.10
Czerny 1949   4  0.7327  0.0012  0.125  0.5818  0.446  0.51
Czerny 1990   1  0.781  0.421  0.411  0.685  0.581  0.63
Duchoud 2007   60  0.5144  0.0061  0.0463  0.0466  0.0468  0.04
Ezaki 2006   17  0.6622  0.0018  0.0919  0.4033  0.2325  0.30
Falvay 1989   12  0.706  0.0410  0.116  0.572  0.672  0.62
Farrell 1958   35  0.6143  0.0039  0.0737  0.2119  0.2828  0.24
Ferenczy 1958   39  0.5910  0.0127  0.0639  0.1538  0.1239  0.13
Fliere 1977   14  0.6883  0.0022  0.0726  0.3254  0.0442  0.11
Fou 1978   37  0.604  0.0611  0.1317  0.4325  0.3315  0.38
Francois 1956   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Friedman 1923   87  0.3073  0.0076  0.0286  0.0253  0.0689  0.03
Friedman 1923b   86  0.3070  0.0075  0.0381  0.0372  0.0574  0.04
Friedman 1930   71  0.4771  0.0064  0.0372  0.0340  0.1552  0.07
Garcia 2007   79  0.3990  0.0077  0.0380  0.0353  0.0569  0.04
Garcia 2007b   88  0.3091  0.0079  0.0382  0.0349  0.0578  0.04
Gierzod 1998   13  0.6875  0.0016  0.0815  0.4433  0.2521  0.33
Gornostaeva 1994   8  0.7120  0.0114  0.1712  0.4913  0.489  0.48
Groot 1988   5  0.733  0.088  0.154  0.593  0.573  0.58
Harasiewicz 1955   52  0.5462  0.0046  0.0549  0.0548  0.0562  0.05
Hatto 1993   84  0.3279  0.0081  0.0285  0.0275  0.0488  0.03
Hatto 1997   80  0.3986  0.0078  0.0373  0.0369  0.0484  0.03
Horowitz 1949   68  0.4984  0.0069  0.0465  0.0467  0.0381  0.03
Indjic 1988   83  0.3587  0.0080  0.0384  0.0380  0.0383  0.03
Kapell 1951   21  0.6629  0.0025  0.0628  0.3145  0.0835  0.16
Kissin 1993   32  0.6346  0.0032  0.0529  0.3134  0.1730  0.23
Kushner 1989   7  0.728  0.026  0.1910  0.5214  0.467  0.49
Luisada 1991   58  0.5265  0.0031  0.0638  0.1853  0.0546  0.09
Lushtak 2004   38  0.5953  0.0020  0.0922  0.3735  0.1926  0.27
Malcuzynski 1961   36  0.6132  0.0055  0.0551  0.0574  0.0366  0.04
Magaloff 1978   18  0.6633  0.0023  0.0623  0.3723  0.3219  0.34
Magin 1975   77  0.4615  0.0140  0.0540  0.1455  0.0549  0.08
Michalowski 1933   74  0.4676  0.0060  0.0464  0.0454  0.0758  0.05
Milkina 1970   25  0.6539  0.0044  0.0641  0.1367  0.0550  0.08
Mohovich 1999   11  0.719  0.024  0.149  0.5422  0.428  0.48
Moravec 1969   23  0.6528  0.0029  0.0833  0.2315  0.4124  0.31
Morozova 2008   62  0.5178  0.0033  0.0635  0.2240  0.1237  0.16
Neighaus 1950   9  0.7114  0.017  0.158  0.5521  0.3312  0.43
Niedzielski 1931   31  0.6321  0.0128  0.0734  0.2225  0.2927  0.25
Ohlsson 1999   34  0.6156  0.0042  0.0542  0.1346  0.0551  0.08
Osinska 1989   6  0.7230  0.0013  0.1711  0.5121  0.3910  0.45
Pachmann 1927   49  0.5541  0.0066  0.0367  0.0324  0.2747  0.09
Paderewski 1930   20  0.6689  0.0036  0.0730  0.3013  0.3720  0.33
Perlemuter 1992   16  0.6725  0.0017  0.0818  0.4223  0.3018  0.35
Pierdomenico 2008   40  0.5940  0.0030  0.0624  0.354  0.5113  0.42
Poblocka 1999   42  0.5866  0.0050  0.0555  0.0560  0.0556  0.05
Rabcewiczowa 1932   10  0.717  0.025  0.147  0.555  0.574  0.56
Rachmaninoff 1923   28  0.6319  0.0135  0.0727  0.3135  0.1632  0.22
Rangell 2001   73  0.4763  0.0071  0.0369  0.0364  0.0387  0.03
Richter 1976   81  0.3985  0.0088  0.0466  0.0471  0.0382  0.03
Rosen 1989   22  0.6638  0.009  0.1213  0.4718  0.4311  0.45
Rosenthal 1930   46  0.5672  0.0063  0.0374  0.0346  0.0670  0.04
Rosenthal 1931   70  0.4831  0.0084  0.0376  0.0338  0.1455  0.06
Rosenthal 1931b   76  0.4680  0.0083  0.0288  0.0241  0.0977  0.04
Rosenthal 1931c   50  0.5559  0.0062  0.0461  0.0424  0.3343  0.11
Rosenthal 1931d   66  0.4967  0.0085  0.0462  0.0466  0.0475  0.04
Rossi 2007   75  0.4611  0.0157  0.0553  0.0514  0.3938  0.14
Rubinstein 1939   82  0.3652  0.0087  0.0379  0.0365  0.0480  0.03
Rubinstein 1952   51  0.5436  0.0053  0.0558  0.0532  0.2941  0.12
Rubinstein 1966   44  0.5724  0.0048  0.0552  0.0542  0.1648  0.09
Schilhawsky 1960   41  0.5955  0.0056  0.0546  0.0558  0.0559  0.05
Shebanova 2002   27  0.6351  0.0037  0.0636  0.2240  0.1634  0.19
Smith 1975   19  0.6648  0.0019  0.1220  0.4028  0.2623  0.32
Sokolov 2002   43  0.5826  0.0045  0.0645  0.1142  0.1440  0.12
Sztompka 1959   15  0.6747  0.0021  0.1014  0.4527  0.3116  0.37
Tomsic 1995   33  0.6217  0.0134  0.0731  0.3014  0.5014  0.39
Uninsky 1932   57  0.5349  0.0051  0.0550  0.0551  0.0660  0.05
Uninsky 1971   56  0.5368  0.0054  0.0557  0.0546  0.0854  0.06
Wasowski 1980   48  0.5516  0.0152  0.0554  0.0567  0.0464  0.04
Zak 1937   30  0.6312  0.0126  0.0725  0.3548  0.0736  0.16
Zak 1951   29  0.6323  0.0024  0.0621  0.3939  0.1429  0.23
Average   2  0.775  0.043  0.242  0.6835  0.2017  0.37
Random 1   91  -0.2181  0.0091  0.0191  0.0181  0.0291  0.01
Random 2   90  -0.1182  0.0090  0.0289  0.0255  0.0485  0.03
Random 3   89  -0.0645  0.0089  0.0290  0.0224  0.2553  0.07

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).