Francois 1956

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   31  0.3079  0.0041  0.0731  0.2065  0.0439  0.09
Anderszewski 2003   71  0.2257  0.0051  0.0553  0.0580  0.0364  0.04
Ashkenazy 1981   48  0.2745  0.0067  0.0467  0.0484  0.0385  0.03
Bacha 2000   62  0.2438  0.0034  0.0537  0.1743  0.1425  0.15
Badura 1965   85  0.1740  0.0082  0.0285  0.0278  0.0389  0.02
Barbosa 1983   51  0.2639  0.0048  0.0455  0.0474  0.0462  0.04
Biret 1990   9  0.412  0.193  0.302  0.7812  0.623  0.70
Blet 2003   26  0.3136  0.0031  0.0735  0.1963  0.0438  0.09
Block 1995   78  0.2076  0.0076  0.0382  0.0372  0.0484  0.03
Blumental 1952   83  0.1841  0.0071  0.0377  0.0368  0.0569  0.04
Boshniakovich 1969   37  0.2822  0.0043  0.0840  0.1576  0.0444  0.08
Brailowsky 1960   72  0.2288  0.0080  0.0372  0.0365  0.0555  0.04
Bunin 1987   58  0.2542  0.0058  0.0546  0.0583  0.0370  0.04
Bunin 1987b   65  0.2471  0.0063  0.0470  0.0484  0.0376  0.03
Chiu 1999   61  0.2464  0.0079  0.0376  0.0386  0.0286  0.02
Cohen 1997   5  0.435  0.047  0.226  0.762  0.732  0.74
Cortot 1951   28  0.3044  0.0030  0.0729  0.2524  0.3615  0.30
Csalog 1996   82  0.1889  0.0087  0.0374  0.0383  0.0379  0.03
Czerny 1949   1  0.461  0.301  0.293  0.7811  0.731  0.75
Czerny 1990   59  0.2580  0.0065  0.0466  0.0471  0.0472  0.04
Duchoud 2007   45  0.2729  0.0064  0.0454  0.0476  0.0466  0.04
Ezaki 2006   17  0.3519  0.0019  0.1718  0.5444  0.1714  0.30
Falvay 1989   39  0.2820  0.0032  0.0630  0.2375  0.0434  0.10
Farrell 1958   21  0.3311  0.0115  0.1617  0.5821  0.3812  0.47
Ferenczy 1958   75  0.2165  0.0075  0.0378  0.0353  0.0665  0.04
Fliere 1977   29  0.3050  0.0052  0.0645  0.0675  0.0450  0.05
Fou 1978   33  0.2934  0.0037  0.0542  0.1375  0.0348  0.06
Francois 1956   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Friedman 1923   67  0.2377  0.0055  0.0463  0.0443  0.1147  0.07
Friedman 1923b   74  0.2255  0.0056  0.0548  0.0572  0.0471  0.04
Friedman 1930   56  0.2559  0.0057  0.0547  0.0550  0.0653  0.05
Garcia 2007   80  0.1973  0.0078  0.0375  0.0356  0.0567  0.04
Garcia 2007b   57  0.2517  0.0053  0.0468  0.0457  0.0573  0.04
Gierzod 1998   68  0.2382  0.0068  0.0459  0.0482  0.0383  0.03
Gornostaeva 1994   2  0.457  0.026  0.234  0.7614  0.555  0.65
Groot 1988   22  0.3325  0.0022  0.1023  0.4285  0.0332  0.11
Harasiewicz 1955   7  0.4149  0.0011  0.1610  0.6861  0.0523  0.18
Hatto 1993   46  0.2754  0.0044  0.0544  0.1062  0.0546  0.07
Hatto 1997   19  0.3418  0.0014  0.1415  0.5972  0.0427  0.15
Horowitz 1949   81  0.1960  0.0081  0.0379  0.0368  0.0477  0.03
Indjic 1988   53  0.2683  0.0047  0.0457  0.0471  0.0461  0.04
Kapell 1951   47  0.2767  0.0060  0.0464  0.0456  0.0652  0.05
Kissin 1993   86  0.1663  0.0085  0.0283  0.0282  0.0388  0.02
Kushner 1989   40  0.2866  0.0054  0.0462  0.0485  0.0375  0.03
Luisada 1991   44  0.2737  0.0062  0.0461  0.0472  0.0454  0.04
Lushtak 2004   32  0.3027  0.0028  0.0726  0.3161  0.0531  0.12
Malcuzynski 1961   43  0.2781  0.0049  0.0551  0.0581  0.0358  0.04
Magaloff 1978   23  0.3343  0.0026  0.0725  0.3268  0.0333  0.10
Magin 1975   25  0.3115  0.0125  0.0827  0.2773  0.0435  0.10
Michalowski 1933   52  0.269  0.0245  0.0549  0.0543  0.1537  0.09
Milkina 1970   3  0.443  0.192  0.301  0.7919  0.574  0.67
Mohovich 1999   20  0.3451  0.0020  0.2119  0.5268  0.0428  0.14
Moravec 1969   49  0.2748  0.0033  0.0533  0.2076  0.0341  0.08
Morozova 2008   60  0.2561  0.0070  0.0373  0.0385  0.0380  0.03
Neighaus 1950   4  0.434  0.074  0.207  0.728  0.537  0.62
Niedzielski 1931   84  0.1768  0.0083  0.0284  0.0269  0.0474  0.03
Ohlsson 1999   16  0.3712  0.0121  0.1120  0.4657  0.0526  0.15
Osinska 1989   6  0.4214  0.0112  0.189  0.7036  0.2313  0.40
Pachmann 1927   79  0.2053  0.0086  0.0286  0.0281  0.0387  0.02
Paderewski 1930   50  0.2626  0.0027  0.0828  0.2736  0.3216  0.29
Perlemuter 1992   14  0.3813  0.0116  0.1614  0.6215  0.4711  0.54
Pierdomenico 2008   35  0.2932  0.0035  0.0532  0.2031  0.2420  0.22
Poblocka 1999   63  0.2485  0.0069  0.0458  0.0476  0.0456  0.04
Rabcewiczowa 1932   15  0.376  0.048  0.2512  0.6720  0.519  0.58
Rachmaninoff 1923   42  0.2875  0.0042  0.0739  0.1670  0.0442  0.08
Rangell 2001   34  0.2956  0.0023  0.0922  0.4343  0.1718  0.27
Richter 1976   76  0.2152  0.0084  0.0287  0.0280  0.0478  0.03
Rosen 1989   18  0.358  0.0218  0.1421  0.4361  0.0429  0.13
Rosenthal 1930   41  0.2869  0.0059  0.0460  0.0456  0.0568  0.04
Rosenthal 1931   87  0.1658  0.0073  0.0469  0.0455  0.0563  0.04
Rosenthal 1931b   77  0.2070  0.0038  0.0538  0.1632  0.3219  0.23
Rosenthal 1931c   54  0.2684  0.0036  0.0634  0.1938  0.1824  0.18
Rosenthal 1931d   66  0.2331  0.0039  0.0641  0.1524  0.3121  0.22
Rossi 2007   64  0.2433  0.0074  0.0371  0.0345  0.0751  0.05
Rubinstein 1939   24  0.3230  0.0024  0.0924  0.3859  0.0430  0.12
Rubinstein 1952   8  0.4110  0.015  0.225  0.7626  0.478  0.60
Rubinstein 1966   13  0.3921  0.009  0.2111  0.6841  0.1217  0.29
Schilhawsky 1960   30  0.3024  0.0029  0.0743  0.1267  0.0445  0.07
Shebanova 2002   69  0.2362  0.0077  0.0381  0.0379  0.0482  0.03
Smith 1975   11  0.3928  0.0013  0.2213  0.6620  0.4810  0.56
Sokolov 2002   10  0.4016  0.0010  0.198  0.708  0.566  0.63
Sztompka 1959   38  0.2886  0.0061  0.0465  0.0481  0.0460  0.04
Tomsic 1995   36  0.2835  0.0040  0.0636  0.1854  0.0636  0.10
Uninsky 1932   73  0.2278  0.0072  0.0380  0.0379  0.0381  0.03
Uninsky 1971   12  0.3923  0.0017  0.2016  0.5949  0.0622  0.19
Wasowski 1980   27  0.3072  0.0050  0.0550  0.0547  0.0649  0.05
Zak 1937   70  0.2390  0.0066  0.0456  0.0474  0.0457  0.04
Zak 1951   55  0.2674  0.0046  0.0552  0.0575  0.0459  0.04
Random 1   90  -0.0587  0.0090  0.0190  0.0178  0.0290  0.01
Random 2   88  0.0446  0.0088  0.0288  0.0220  0.3243  0.08
Random 3   89  -0.0147  0.0089  0.0289  0.0212  0.4140  0.09

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).