Hatto 1993

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   41  0.4941  0.0032  0.0530  0.1948  0.0541  0.10
Anderszewski 2003   4  0.707  0.003  0.246  0.616  0.505  0.55
Ashkenazy 1981   3  0.7311  0.005  0.157  0.615  0.543  0.57
Bacha 2000   30  0.5217  0.0035  0.0427  0.2135  0.1826  0.19
Badura 1965   45  0.4835  0.0047  0.0555  0.0533  0.2838  0.12
Barbosa 1983   54  0.4522  0.0050  0.0465  0.0442  0.1356  0.07
Biret 1990   22  0.5555  0.0028  0.0825  0.2542  0.1529  0.19
Blet 2003   23  0.5542  0.0027  0.0621  0.2730  0.2319  0.25
Block 1995   85  0.2612  0.0078  0.0474  0.0475  0.0380  0.03
Blumental 1952   26  0.5377  0.0057  0.0381  0.0331  0.1758  0.07
Boshniakovich 1969   57  0.4578  0.0041  0.0639  0.1233  0.2134  0.16
Brailowsky 1960   59  0.4456  0.0068  0.0649  0.0667  0.0462  0.05
Bunin 1987   50  0.4679  0.0062  0.0459  0.0443  0.1654  0.08
Bunin 1987b   53  0.4557  0.0061  0.0461  0.0442  0.1550  0.08
Chiu 1999   28  0.5358  0.0049  0.0462  0.0435  0.1943  0.09
Cohen 1997   63  0.4336  0.0071  0.0385  0.0332  0.1559  0.07
Cortot 1951   55  0.4580  0.0063  0.0554  0.0561  0.0565  0.05
Csalog 1996   83  0.2743  0.0067  0.0651  0.0638  0.1546  0.09
Czerny 1949   52  0.4623  0.0043  0.0540  0.1275  0.0457  0.07
Czerny 1990   32  0.5159  0.0054  0.0463  0.0458  0.0471  0.04
Duchoud 2007   19  0.5681  0.0014  0.1120  0.2920  0.3615  0.32
Ezaki 2006   14  0.5860  0.0029  0.0737  0.1554  0.0447  0.08
Falvay 1989   81  0.2825  0.0084  0.0289  0.0270  0.0473  0.03
Farrell 1958   29  0.5324  0.0064  0.0648  0.0654  0.0564  0.05
Ferenczy 1958   44  0.4861  0.0046  0.0556  0.0534  0.2040  0.10
Fliere 1977   8  0.628  0.0010  0.108  0.6031  0.299  0.42
Fou 1978   36  0.5018  0.0025  0.0926  0.2265  0.0444  0.09
Francois 1956   76  0.3228  0.0073  0.0475  0.0485  0.0288  0.03
Friedman 1923   18  0.5644  0.0051  0.0470  0.0427  0.2939  0.11
Friedman 1923b   16  0.5715  0.0034  0.0545  0.0924  0.3132  0.17
Friedman 1930   24  0.556  0.0026  0.0629  0.1921  0.4116  0.28
Garcia 2007   40  0.4945  0.0056  0.0471  0.0440  0.1653  0.08
Garcia 2007b   49  0.4637  0.0053  0.0457  0.0434  0.1460  0.07
Gierzod 1998   11  0.6062  0.0013  0.169  0.5923  0.358  0.45
Gornostaeva 1994   74  0.3363  0.0079  0.0472  0.0487  0.0282  0.03
Groot 1988   70  0.3582  0.0070  0.0383  0.0376  0.0384  0.03
Harasiewicz 1955   39  0.4964  0.0024  0.0824  0.2644  0.1035  0.16
Hatto 1993   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Hatto 1997   2  0.982  0.012  0.952  0.982  0.972  0.97
Horowitz 1949   46  0.4729  0.0021  0.0828  0.2031  0.3318  0.26
Indjic 1988   1  0.991  0.991  0.981  1.001  1.001  1.00
Kapell 1951   35  0.5165  0.0019  0.0919  0.2939  0.1523  0.21
Kissin 1993   56  0.4530  0.0023  0.0723  0.2637  0.1525  0.20
Kushner 1989   37  0.504  0.0059  0.0553  0.0584  0.0368  0.04
Luisada 1991   5  0.6910  0.006  0.124  0.639  0.494  0.56
Lushtak 2004   9  0.6213  0.0020  0.1018  0.3243  0.1030  0.18
Malcuzynski 1961   73  0.3426  0.0039  0.0831  0.1956  0.0445  0.09
Magaloff 1978   67  0.4183  0.0036  0.0534  0.1761  0.0448  0.08
Magin 1975   12  0.583  0.0012  0.1813  0.4724  0.2612  0.35
Michalowski 1933   60  0.445  0.0033  0.0736  0.1635  0.2824  0.21
Milkina 1970   58  0.4431  0.0037  0.0532  0.1879  0.0449  0.08
Mohovich 1999   62  0.4384  0.0048  0.0460  0.0465  0.0470  0.04
Moravec 1969   77  0.2985  0.0076  0.0380  0.0358  0.0472  0.03
Morozova 2008   10  0.6219  0.0011  0.1122  0.2630  0.2221  0.24
Neighaus 1950   20  0.5616  0.0022  0.0711  0.4950  0.0633  0.17
Niedzielski 1931   66  0.4138  0.0031  0.0538  0.1327  0.2828  0.19
Ohlsson 1999   6  0.6766  0.007  0.215  0.6214  0.446  0.52
Osinska 1989   61  0.4367  0.0065  0.0846  0.0866  0.0461  0.06
Pachmann 1927   72  0.3446  0.0075  0.0473  0.0431  0.1852  0.08
Paderewski 1930   64  0.4232  0.0066  0.0650  0.0641  0.1151  0.08
Perlemuter 1992   68  0.4120  0.0069  0.0652  0.0684  0.0366  0.04
Pierdomenico 2008   80  0.2839  0.0081  0.0467  0.0470  0.0375  0.03
Poblocka 1999   31  0.5268  0.008  0.1112  0.4827  0.2511  0.35
Rabcewiczowa 1932   71  0.3547  0.0072  0.0384  0.0372  0.0376  0.03
Rachmaninoff 1923   43  0.4869  0.0060  0.0747  0.0773  0.0463  0.05
Rangell 2001   87  0.2486  0.0080  0.0379  0.0355  0.0483  0.03
Richter 1976   65  0.4270  0.0040  0.0735  0.1626  0.2922  0.22
Rosen 1989   48  0.4671  0.0038  0.0733  0.1848  0.0642  0.10
Rosenthal 1930   69  0.3687  0.0074  0.0376  0.0370  0.0379  0.03
Rosenthal 1931   82  0.2872  0.0087  0.0469  0.0483  0.0278  0.03
Rosenthal 1931b   79  0.2973  0.0086  0.0382  0.0379  0.0385  0.03
Rosenthal 1931c   78  0.2974  0.0083  0.0378  0.0377  0.0386  0.03
Rosenthal 1931d   86  0.2648  0.0085  0.0387  0.0386  0.0291  0.02
Rossi 2007   88  0.1649  0.0088  0.0288  0.0284  0.0389  0.02
Rubinstein 1939   17  0.5650  0.0030  0.0543  0.1015  0.3627  0.19
Rubinstein 1952   84  0.2775  0.0077  0.0377  0.0371  0.0487  0.03
Rubinstein 1966   13  0.5851  0.0042  0.0641  0.1238  0.2331  0.17
Schilhawsky 1960   15  0.5752  0.009  0.1110  0.5730  0.367  0.45
Shebanova 2002   27  0.5333  0.0018  0.1316  0.3627  0.3013  0.33
Smith 1975   47  0.4721  0.0055  0.0468  0.0486  0.0274  0.03
Sokolov 2002   33  0.5153  0.0052  0.0464  0.0452  0.0467  0.04
Sztompka 1959   38  0.5088  0.0058  0.0466  0.0466  0.0569  0.04
Tomsic 1995   75  0.3327  0.0082  0.0458  0.0487  0.0277  0.03
Uninsky 1932   51  0.4654  0.0045  0.0544  0.0941  0.1836  0.13
Uninsky 1971   42  0.4976  0.0017  0.0814  0.4323  0.3610  0.39
Wasowski 1980   34  0.5134  0.0044  0.0542  0.1053  0.0555  0.07
Zak 1937   21  0.5514  0.0016  0.0815  0.3829  0.2714  0.32
Zak 1951   25  0.5340  0.0015  0.1017  0.3533  0.1917  0.26
Average   7  0.669  0.004  0.153  0.6746  0.0920  0.25
Random 1   91  -0.1289  0.0091  0.0191  0.0149  0.0590  0.02
Random 2   89  0.0490  0.0089  0.0386  0.034  0.5237  0.12
Random 3   90  0.0091  0.0090  0.0190  0.0141  0.1181  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).