Ferenczy 1958

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   35  0.5762  0.0051  0.0643  0.0662  0.0447  0.05
Ashkenazy 1981   46  0.5358  0.0048  0.0462  0.0454  0.0651  0.05
Beliavsky 2004   58  0.4432  0.0059  0.0553  0.0555  0.0544  0.05
BenOr 1989   4  0.688  0.023  0.244  0.7440  0.078  0.23
Biret 1990   37  0.5648  0.0040  0.0838  0.0852  0.0540  0.06
Blet 2003   5  0.6629  0.0014  0.1312  0.6227  0.156  0.30
Block 1995   30  0.5947  0.0035  0.0835  0.0857  0.0438  0.06
Brailowsky 1960   20  0.622  0.059  0.1515  0.5910  0.572  0.58
Chiu 1999   21  0.6228  0.0021  0.1426  0.3150  0.0524  0.12
Clidat 1994   27  0.6037  0.0023  0.1122  0.3752  0.0622  0.15
Cohen 1997   60  0.4164  0.0062  0.0649  0.0660  0.0452  0.05
Coop 1987   3  0.6910  0.012  0.282  0.7653  0.0513  0.19
Cortot 1951   57  0.4441  0.0061  0.0459  0.0449  0.0562  0.04
Czerny 1949   51  0.5143  0.0024  0.1027  0.3062  0.0428  0.11
Czerny 1949b   47  0.5359  0.0038  0.0642  0.0653  0.0543  0.05
Ezaki 2006   1  0.711  0.631  0.621  0.8429  0.213  0.42
Falvay 1989   9  0.6515  0.0116  0.159  0.6350  0.0611  0.19
Ferenczy 1958   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Fiorentino 1962   14  0.6323  0.008  0.196  0.6629  0.274  0.42
Fliere 1977   23  0.6117  0.0119  0.1118  0.5457  0.0615  0.18
Fou 1978   26  0.6053  0.0020  0.1219  0.5158  0.0519  0.16
Francois 1956   45  0.5320  0.0037  0.0646  0.0662  0.0363  0.04
Hatto 1997   32  0.5854  0.0052  0.0647  0.0657  0.0545  0.05
Horowitz 1971   36  0.5621  0.0039  0.0740  0.0762  0.0453  0.05
Horowitz 1985   59  0.4234  0.0058  0.0552  0.0554  0.0457  0.04
Indjic 2001   33  0.5718  0.0055  0.0836  0.0842  0.0734  0.07
Kapell 1951   8  0.6613  0.0117  0.1616  0.5853  0.0612  0.19
Kiepura 1999   44  0.5438  0.0049  0.0558  0.0562  0.0455  0.04
Kilenyi 1937   18  0.6231  0.0015  0.1514  0.6161  0.0517  0.17
Kissin 1993   19  0.6260  0.0031  0.1228  0.2351  0.0526  0.11
Kitain 1937   62  0.2626  0.0060  0.0460  0.0443  0.0561  0.04
Kushner 1990   15  0.639  0.0212  0.1113  0.6252  0.0516  0.18
Levy 1951   39  0.5544  0.0041  0.0739  0.0744  0.0636  0.06
Luisada 1990   55  0.4849  0.0056  0.0556  0.0561  0.0459  0.04
Lushtak 2004   13  0.6325  0.0028  0.1023  0.3642  0.0720  0.16
Lympany 1968   16  0.634  0.0432  0.1131  0.2255  0.0529  0.10
Magaloff 1977   34  0.5736  0.0043  0.0551  0.0549  0.0646  0.05
Magaloff 1977b   38  0.5550  0.0053  0.0645  0.0658  0.0450  0.05
Magin 1975   28  0.6040  0.0029  0.0925  0.3158  0.0525  0.12
Milkina 1970   24  0.6161  0.0033  0.0934  0.0962  0.0437  0.06
Mohovich 1999   41  0.5546  0.0034  0.1033  0.1060  0.0439  0.06
Nadelmann 1956   29  0.5919  0.0025  0.0924  0.3357  0.0427  0.11
Ohlsson 1999   25  0.6139  0.0030  0.0830  0.2251  0.0531  0.10
Olejniczac 1990   17  0.6211  0.017  0.145  0.6829  0.245  0.40
Olejniczak 1991   12  0.633  0.046  0.118  0.6534  0.127  0.28
Osinska 1989   10  0.6516  0.0113  0.137  0.6558  0.0418  0.16
Paderewski 1912   53  0.5045  0.0042  0.0648  0.0658  0.0448  0.05
Perahia 1994   54  0.4835  0.0045  0.0554  0.0552  0.0549  0.05
Perlemuter 1986   48  0.5222  0.0027  0.1032  0.2062  0.0433  0.09
Poblocka 1999   11  0.6414  0.0111  0.1110  0.6341  0.079  0.21
Rangell 2001   42  0.5427  0.0054  0.0641  0.0657  0.0554  0.05
Risler 1920   52  0.5055  0.0050  0.0644  0.0658  0.0541  0.05
Rosen 1989   6  0.666  0.035  0.1211  0.628  0.581  0.60
Rubinstein 1939   56  0.4552  0.0046  0.0557  0.0549  0.0542  0.05
Rubinstein 1952   31  0.5912  0.0110  0.1420  0.4948  0.0521  0.16
Rubinstein 1966   22  0.6124  0.0022  0.1321  0.4246  0.0523  0.14
Rummel 1943   61  0.3957  0.0057  0.0550  0.0558  0.0360  0.04
Shebanova 2002   2  0.705  0.034  0.243  0.7557  0.0514  0.19
Smith 1975   40  0.5530  0.0026  0.0929  0.2360  0.0430  0.10
Szpilman 1948   43  0.5463  0.0036  0.0837  0.0862  0.0435  0.06
Uninsky 1971   49  0.5256  0.0047  0.0461  0.0455  0.0558  0.04
Wasowski 1980   50  0.5133  0.0044  0.0555  0.0556  0.0456  0.04
Weissenberg 1971   7  0.667  0.0218  0.1917  0.5642  0.0710  0.20
Random 1    64  0.0042  0.0063  0.0264  0.0210  0.4032  0.09
Random 2   63  0.0151  0.0064  0.0363  0.0357  0.0364  0.03
Random 3   65  -0.0965  0.0065  0.0265  0.0251  0.0465  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).