Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   35  0.4261  0.0022  0.0620  0.3858  0.0438  0.12
Anderszewski 2003   24  0.4539  0.0035  0.0722  0.3743  0.1221  0.21
Ashkenazy 1981   5  0.526  0.053  0.182  0.7025  0.412  0.54
Bacha 2000   77  0.2420  0.0170  0.0568  0.0585  0.0357  0.04
Badura 1965   39  0.4071  0.0053  0.0750  0.0757  0.0550  0.06
Barbosa 1983   80  0.2480  0.0069  0.0379  0.0378  0.0484  0.03
Biret 1990   42  0.4034  0.0044  0.0942  0.1952  0.0642  0.11
Blet 2003   32  0.4322  0.0127  0.0532  0.3242  0.1122  0.19
Block 1995   62  0.3456  0.0059  0.0563  0.0559  0.0471  0.04
Blumental 1952   38  0.4121  0.0121  0.0731  0.3333  0.1820  0.24
Boshniakovich 1969   11  0.4950  0.0026  0.0635  0.2749  0.0635  0.13
Brailowsky 1960   76  0.2781  0.0081  0.0387  0.0367  0.0477  0.03
Bunin 1987   46  0.3823  0.0030  0.0629  0.3429  0.3116  0.32
Bunin 1987b   47  0.3864  0.0032  0.0630  0.3328  0.3215  0.32
Chiu 1999   63  0.3325  0.0055  0.0565  0.0561  0.0461  0.04
Cohen 1997   86  0.1835  0.0082  0.0388  0.0383  0.0388  0.03
Cortot 1951   44  0.3988  0.0038  0.0744  0.1835  0.1825  0.18
Csalog 1996   85  0.2140  0.0079  0.0477  0.0486  0.0386  0.03
Czerny 1949   22  0.4514  0.0112  0.1313  0.4439  0.1719  0.27
Czerny 1990   21  0.4533  0.0033  0.0627  0.3563  0.0439  0.12
Duchoud 2007   37  0.4113  0.0120  0.0819  0.3921  0.408  0.39
Ezaki 2006   52  0.3870  0.0058  0.0652  0.0679  0.0356  0.04
Falvay 1989   83  0.2254  0.0076  0.0476  0.0465  0.0562  0.04
Farrell 1958   74  0.2983  0.0072  0.0659  0.0684  0.0280  0.03
Ferenczy 1958   60  0.3484  0.0036  0.0843  0.1938  0.1824  0.18
Fliere 1977   8  0.5018  0.0124  0.0624  0.3672  0.0436  0.12
Fou 1978   73  0.2968  0.0068  0.0378  0.0385  0.0381  0.03
Francois 1956   51  0.3857  0.0048  0.0654  0.0678  0.0376  0.04
Friedman 1923   41  0.4063  0.0037  0.0639  0.2418  0.3917  0.31
Friedman 1923b   36  0.4228  0.0034  0.0633  0.3118  0.4213  0.36
Friedman 1930   9  0.4941  0.0023  0.0618  0.4022  0.417  0.40
Garcia 2007   54  0.3660  0.0056  0.0653  0.0657  0.0553  0.05
Garcia 2007b   31  0.4315  0.0131  0.0626  0.3513  0.449  0.39
Gierzod 1998   28  0.4373  0.0025  0.0616  0.4048  0.0726  0.17
Gornostaeva 1994   33  0.4336  0.0045  0.0845  0.1569  0.0347  0.07
Groot 1988   66  0.3355  0.0062  0.0567  0.0577  0.0374  0.04
Harasiewicz 1955   15  0.4852  0.0019  0.0717  0.4056  0.0532  0.14
Hatto 1993   45  0.3947  0.0015  0.0925  0.3653  0.0630  0.15
Hatto 1997   58  0.3577  0.0016  0.0836  0.2658  0.0541  0.11
Horowitz 1949   53  0.3648  0.0064  0.0561  0.0560  0.0466  0.04
Indjic 1988   49  0.3866  0.0013  0.1128  0.3559  0.0534  0.13
Kapell 1951   17  0.4710  0.028  0.2311  0.4733  0.2812  0.36
Kissin 1993   57  0.3685  0.0065  0.0651  0.0680  0.0367  0.04
Kushner 1989   20  0.463  0.0910  0.139  0.4850  0.0723  0.18
Luisada 1991   29  0.4316  0.0139  0.0634  0.2955  0.0633  0.13
Lushtak 2004   69  0.3191  0.0067  0.0474  0.0478  0.0387  0.03
Malcuzynski 1961   26  0.448  0.0342  0.0838  0.2550  0.0540  0.11
Magaloff 1978   55  0.3629  0.0063  0.0560  0.0588  0.0278  0.03
Magin 1975   6  0.515  0.079  0.128  0.5134  0.2114  0.33
Michalowski 1933   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Milkina 1970   59  0.3437  0.0061  0.0570  0.0579  0.0465  0.04
Mohovich 1999   71  0.3087  0.0071  0.0562  0.0580  0.0372  0.04
Moravec 1969   68  0.3126  0.0060  0.0566  0.0574  0.0458  0.04
Morozova 2008   30  0.4331  0.0040  0.0737  0.2551  0.0637  0.12
Neighaus 1950   14  0.4830  0.0017  0.0714  0.4346  0.0727  0.17
Niedzielski 1931   50  0.3843  0.0054  0.0658  0.0661  0.0364  0.04
Ohlsson 1999   16  0.4838  0.0014  0.1112  0.4550  0.0528  0.15
Osinska 1989   27  0.4445  0.0051  0.0848  0.0854  0.0645  0.07
Pachmann 1927   75  0.2932  0.0078  0.0380  0.0385  0.0383  0.03
Paderewski 1930   10  0.4912  0.0118  0.0715  0.4010  0.3710  0.38
Perlemuter 1992   43  0.3975  0.0047  0.0657  0.0676  0.0359  0.04
Pierdomenico 2008   65  0.3353  0.0073  0.0471  0.0471  0.0463  0.04
Poblocka 1999   13  0.487  0.037  0.1910  0.4827  0.336  0.40
Rabcewiczowa 1932   12  0.4872  0.0029  0.0623  0.3629  0.2418  0.29
Rachmaninoff 1923   48  0.3817  0.0149  0.0846  0.0872  0.0448  0.06
Rangell 2001   72  0.2942  0.0074  0.0569  0.0587  0.0373  0.04
Richter 1976   40  0.4019  0.0150  0.0847  0.0846  0.0746  0.07
Rosen 1989   25  0.4458  0.0043  0.0841  0.2087  0.0344  0.08
Rosenthal 1930   56  0.3667  0.0066  0.0472  0.0464  0.0570  0.04
Rosenthal 1931   81  0.2390  0.0085  0.0385  0.0378  0.0385  0.03
Rosenthal 1931b   78  0.2478  0.0080  0.0382  0.0380  0.0291  0.02
Rosenthal 1931c   67  0.3249  0.0075  0.0564  0.0583  0.0375  0.04
Rosenthal 1931d   82  0.2365  0.0084  0.0386  0.0384  0.0290  0.02
Rossi 2007   70  0.3027  0.0077  0.0381  0.0359  0.0560  0.04
Rubinstein 1939   88  0.1476  0.0088  0.0475  0.0482  0.0379  0.03
Rubinstein 1952   87  0.1744  0.0087  0.0384  0.0367  0.0489  0.03
Rubinstein 1966   84  0.2279  0.0086  0.0473  0.0474  0.0468  0.04
Schilhawsky 1960   4  0.529  0.026  0.254  0.5714  0.521  0.54
Shebanova 2002   23  0.4559  0.0028  0.0521  0.3763  0.0531  0.14
Smith 1975   18  0.4724  0.0041  0.0840  0.2270  0.0343  0.08
Sokolov 2002   19  0.4646  0.0011  0.146  0.5434  0.2511  0.37
Sztompka 1959   1  0.572  0.172  0.253  0.6315  0.453  0.53
Tomsic 1995   79  0.2486  0.0083  0.0383  0.0387  0.0382  0.03
Uninsky 1932   3  0.5411  0.025  0.187  0.5213  0.504  0.51
Uninsky 1971   7  0.514  0.084  0.165  0.5422  0.395  0.46
Wasowski 1980   34  0.4262  0.0046  0.0656  0.0673  0.0451  0.05
Zak 1937   64  0.3351  0.0057  0.0655  0.0648  0.0649  0.06
Zak 1951   61  0.3482  0.0052  0.0749  0.0780  0.0452  0.05
Average   2  0.561  0.241  0.231  0.7475  0.0329  0.15
Random 1   91  -0.0574  0.0090  0.0190  0.0127  0.2354  0.05
Random 2   90  -0.0189  0.0089  0.0189  0.0141  0.1369  0.04
Random 3   89  0.0069  0.0091  0.0191  0.0124  0.2755  0.05

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).