Risler 1920

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   54  0.6520  0.0155  0.0461  0.0447  0.0559  0.04
Ashkenazy 1981   45  0.7217  0.0146  0.0549  0.0558  0.0463  0.04
Beliavsky 2004   39  0.749  0.0141  0.0541  0.0539  0.0740  0.06
BenOr 1989   28  0.7929  0.0028  0.0629  0.2557  0.0529  0.11
Biret 1990   44  0.7212  0.0144  0.0544  0.0547  0.0550  0.05
Blet 2003   20  0.8128  0.0022  0.1522  0.3856  0.0428  0.12
Block 1995   34  0.7643  0.0040  0.0636  0.0633  0.1134  0.08
Brailowsky 1960   47  0.7249  0.0038  0.0555  0.0542  0.0644  0.05
Chiu 1999   16  0.8310  0.0116  0.1113  0.5230  0.157  0.28
Clidat 1994   5  0.857  0.027  0.1716  0.5023  0.215  0.32
Cohen 1997   63  0.3827  0.0063  0.0557  0.0548  0.0548  0.05
Coop 1987   4  0.8546  0.003  0.137  0.5538  0.0911  0.22
Cortot 1951   55  0.6432  0.0057  0.0547  0.0556  0.0464  0.04
Czerny 1949   18  0.823  0.055  0.184  0.5831  0.166  0.30
Czerny 1949b   25  0.8023  0.0018  0.1217  0.4844  0.0618  0.17
Ezaki 2006   3  0.862  0.122  0.1312  0.5240  0.0812  0.20
Falvay 1989   27  0.8039  0.0017  0.0921  0.4535  0.119  0.22
Ferenczy 1958   52  0.6866  0.0035  0.0735  0.0751  0.0541  0.06
Fiorentino 1962   8  0.8560  0.0014  0.1310  0.5236  0.0814  0.20
Fliere 1977   17  0.8318  0.0119  0.1120  0.4637  0.0717  0.18
Fou 1978   29  0.7955  0.0030  0.1128  0.2549  0.0627  0.12
Francois 1956   51  0.6959  0.0052  0.0553  0.0546  0.0551  0.05
Hatto 1997   57  0.6165  0.0051  0.0546  0.0560  0.0458  0.04
Horowitz 1971   49  0.7045  0.0056  0.0556  0.0544  0.0649  0.05
Horowitz 1985   58  0.615  0.0261  0.0638  0.0632  0.1131  0.08
Indjic 2001   59  0.6056  0.0053  0.0542  0.0562  0.0462  0.04
Kapell 1951   10  0.8548  0.0013  0.1611  0.5238  0.0813  0.20
Kiepura 1999   46  0.7253  0.0037  0.0548  0.0539  0.0643  0.05
Kilenyi 1937   6  0.8533  0.009  0.108  0.5440  0.0716  0.19
Kissin 1993   14  0.8419  0.0112  0.0915  0.5144  0.0715  0.19
Kitain 1937   61  0.5116  0.0159  0.0364  0.0332  0.1442  0.06
Kushner 1990   23  0.8054  0.0031  0.0831  0.1958  0.0430  0.09
Levy 1951   38  0.7424  0.0047  0.0543  0.0536  0.0645  0.05
Luisada 1990   7  0.8511  0.014  0.205  0.5817  0.373  0.46
Lushtak 2004   33  0.7862  0.0032  0.0632  0.1247  0.0533  0.08
Lympany 1968   42  0.7351  0.0048  0.0460  0.0446  0.0552  0.04
Magaloff 1977   24  0.8035  0.0026  0.0724  0.3452  0.0525  0.13
Magaloff 1977b   26  0.8052  0.0027  0.1125  0.3450  0.0623  0.14
Magin 1975   32  0.784  0.0325  0.0927  0.3246  0.0622  0.14
Milkina 1970   40  0.7431  0.0034  0.0834  0.0841  0.0539  0.06
Mohovich 1999   22  0.8063  0.0024  0.1426  0.3355  0.0526  0.13
Nadelmann 1956   36  0.748  0.0243  0.0550  0.0560  0.0455  0.04
Ohlsson 1999   43  0.7342  0.0045  0.0552  0.0543  0.0546  0.05
Olejniczac 1990   11  0.8534  0.0015  0.1214  0.5143  0.0621  0.17
Olejniczak 1991   15  0.8325  0.0020  0.1519  0.4734  0.1010  0.22
Osinska 1989   31  0.7944  0.0029  0.0930  0.2261  0.0332  0.08
Paderewski 1912   41  0.7336  0.0049  0.0637  0.0662  0.0360  0.04
Perahia 1994   62  0.4964  0.0062  0.0459  0.0461  0.0461  0.04
Perlemuter 1986   21  0.8114  0.0121  0.1718  0.4739  0.0619  0.17
Poblocka 1999   13  0.8458  0.0011  0.119  0.5330  0.138  0.26
Rangell 2001   9  0.8521  0.018  0.182  0.5918  0.432  0.50
Risler 1920   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Rosen 1989   30  0.7913  0.0133  0.0933  0.0947  0.0537  0.07
Rubinstein 1939   60  0.5947  0.0060  0.0462  0.0457  0.0454  0.04
Rubinstein 1952   35  0.7640  0.0039  0.0558  0.0560  0.0465  0.04
Rubinstein 1966   53  0.6615  0.0154  0.0551  0.0564  0.0357  0.04
Rummel 1943   48  0.7026  0.0050  0.0545  0.0530  0.1435  0.08
Shebanova 2002   37  0.7450  0.0036  0.0639  0.0650  0.0547  0.05
Smith 1975   19  0.8237  0.0023  0.1723  0.3648  0.0524  0.13
Szpilman 1948   12  0.846  0.0210  0.103  0.5822  0.254  0.38
Uninsky 1971   50  0.6941  0.0042  0.0540  0.0562  0.0456  0.04
Wasowski 1980   56  0.6257  0.0058  0.0554  0.0564  0.0353  0.04
Weissenberg 1971   1  0.891  0.501  0.491  0.688  0.661  0.67
Average   2  0.8630  0.006  0.216  0.5649  0.0520  0.17
Random 1    66  -0.1022  0.0165  0.0265  0.0215  0.2736  0.07
Random 2   64  0.0561  0.0064  0.0363  0.0346  0.0466  0.03
Random 3   65  -0.0938  0.0066  0.0166  0.012  0.5438  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).