Zak 1951

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   3  0.8011  0.007  0.085  0.5019  0.406  0.45
Anderszewski 2003   45  0.6747  0.0046  0.0745  0.0729  0.2452  0.13
Ashkenazy 1981   8  0.7724  0.006  0.0912  0.387  0.4810  0.43
Bacha 2000   73  0.5448  0.0064  0.0375  0.0352  0.0577  0.04
Badura 1965   44  0.6733  0.0045  0.0549  0.0515  0.5345  0.16
Barbosa 1983   69  0.5649  0.0051  0.0458  0.0415  0.3453  0.12
Biret 1990   46  0.6725  0.0040  0.0639  0.1621  0.3239  0.23
Blet 2003   55  0.6450  0.0066  0.0381  0.0339  0.1570  0.07
Block 1995   68  0.5651  0.0058  0.0462  0.0420  0.2561  0.10
Blumental 1952   43  0.6752  0.0054  0.0463  0.0451  0.0581  0.04
Boshniakovich 1969   22  0.7353  0.0016  0.0810  0.407  0.575  0.48
Brailowsky 1960   71  0.5526  0.0067  0.0385  0.0332  0.2265  0.08
Bunin 1987   57  0.6254  0.0060  0.0460  0.0410  0.4948  0.14
Bunin 1987b   59  0.6155  0.0059  0.0467  0.049  0.4946  0.14
Chiu 1999   51  0.6556  0.0030  0.0538  0.164  0.4531  0.27
Cohen 1997   84  0.4012  0.0082  0.0377  0.0348  0.0583  0.04
Cortot 1951   49  0.6657  0.0056  0.0554  0.0524  0.3849  0.14
Csalog 1996   76  0.5213  0.0070  0.0372  0.0323  0.3159  0.10
Czerny 1949   33  0.6916  0.0031  0.0528  0.2127  0.4228  0.30
Czerny 1990   16  0.7458  0.0034  0.0531  0.1922  0.2838  0.23
Duchoud 2007   65  0.5834  0.0071  0.0382  0.0329  0.2168  0.08
Ezaki 2006   7  0.7917  0.008  0.108  0.485  0.564  0.52
Falvay 1989   78  0.4927  0.0080  0.0557  0.0545  0.1366  0.08
Farrell 1958   52  0.6559  0.0049  0.0552  0.0542  0.1562  0.09
Ferenczy 1958   62  0.6060  0.0073  0.0470  0.0426  0.2560  0.10
Fliere 1977   6  0.7935  0.005  0.114  0.5020  0.378  0.43
Fou 1978   30  0.7036  0.0048  0.0551  0.0536  0.1563  0.09
Francois 1956   66  0.5737  0.0076  0.0461  0.0443  0.1074  0.06
Friedman 1923   21  0.736  0.0032  0.0527  0.2115  0.5025  0.32
Friedman 1923b   20  0.733  0.0027  0.0526  0.2314  0.5122  0.34
Friedman 1930   29  0.7061  0.0037  0.0533  0.188  0.5426  0.31
Garcia 2007   50  0.6662  0.0072  0.0376  0.0346  0.0876  0.05
Garcia 2007b   56  0.6263  0.0068  0.0380  0.0351  0.0587  0.04
Gierzod 1998   15  0.7520  0.0022  0.0813  0.3422  0.3720  0.35
Gornostaeva 1994   75  0.5238  0.0062  0.0465  0.0460  0.0484  0.04
Groot 1988   53  0.6464  0.0028  0.0536  0.188  0.4929  0.30
Harasiewicz 1955   13  0.7621  0.002  0.212  0.632  0.562  0.59
Hatto 1993   10  0.7765  0.0013  0.0914  0.3315  0.3918  0.36
Hatto 1997   11  0.7739  0.0015  0.1416  0.3317  0.3917  0.36
Horowitz 1949   37  0.6966  0.0044  0.0544  0.1020  0.4640  0.21
Indjic 1988   9  0.777  0.0014  0.1215  0.3316  0.3916  0.36
Kapell 1951   17  0.7467  0.003  0.096  0.497  0.407  0.44
Kissin 1993   2  0.8140  0.004  0.093  0.557  0.533  0.54
Kushner 1989   19  0.7441  0.0033  0.0524  0.2522  0.3727  0.30
Luisada 1991   5  0.7918  0.0010  0.109  0.4311  0.4012  0.41
Lushtak 2004   14  0.768  0.0011  0.1211  0.402  0.4511  0.42
Malcuzynski 1961   79  0.4768  0.0061  0.0383  0.0337  0.1569  0.07
Magaloff 1978   61  0.6169  0.0063  0.0469  0.0426  0.2557  0.10
Magin 1975   23  0.7342  0.0036  0.0537  0.1823  0.3536  0.25
Michalowski 1933   67  0.5770  0.0069  0.0378  0.0341  0.1372  0.06
Milkina 1970   42  0.6871  0.0025  0.0635  0.1817  0.4032  0.27
Mohovich 1999   39  0.6843  0.0043  0.0740  0.1519  0.4534  0.26
Moravec 1969   82  0.4122  0.0084  0.0386  0.0352  0.0578  0.04
Morozova 2008   4  0.7928  0.0012  0.0821  0.2717  0.3924  0.32
Neighaus 1950   35  0.6972  0.0017  0.1018  0.3123  0.3823  0.34
Niedzielski 1931   54  0.6473  0.0057  0.0648  0.0631  0.2850  0.13
Ohlsson 1999   24  0.7129  0.0021  0.0717  0.3212  0.4115  0.36
Osinska 1989   26  0.712  0.0038  0.0625  0.2427  0.3330  0.28
Pachmann 1927   74  0.5430  0.0077  0.0553  0.0518  0.3451  0.13
Paderewski 1930   63  0.6074  0.0075  0.0466  0.0433  0.1567  0.08
Perlemuter 1992   31  0.7075  0.0035  0.0530  0.1923  0.2837  0.23
Pierdomenico 2008   72  0.5431  0.0024  0.0643  0.1027  0.3043  0.17
Poblocka 1999   32  0.709  0.0023  0.0819  0.3020  0.4119  0.35
Rabcewiczowa 1932   60  0.6144  0.0074  0.0464  0.0449  0.0580  0.04
Rachmaninoff 1923   34  0.6910  0.0039  0.0732  0.1818  0.3435  0.25
Rangell 2001   81  0.4176  0.0079  0.0646  0.0633  0.2156  0.11
Richter 1976   58  0.6219  0.0053  0.0471  0.0421  0.4747  0.14
Rosen 1989   40  0.6845  0.0047  0.0459  0.0430  0.2064  0.09
Rosenthal 1930   77  0.5077  0.0078  0.0550  0.0544  0.0773  0.06
Rosenthal 1931   86  0.3978  0.0085  0.0287  0.0251  0.0588  0.03
Rosenthal 1931b   85  0.3979  0.0086  0.0374  0.0349  0.0685  0.04
Rosenthal 1931c   83  0.404  0.0083  0.0379  0.0350  0.0586  0.04
Rosenthal 1931d   87  0.3880  0.0087  0.0468  0.0478  0.0390  0.03
Rossi 2007   80  0.4481  0.0081  0.0373  0.0351  0.0679  0.04
Rubinstein 1939   28  0.7114  0.0029  0.0642  0.1217  0.3541  0.20
Rubinstein 1952   64  0.5982  0.0020  0.0741  0.1336  0.3142  0.20
Rubinstein 1966   27  0.7115  0.0018  0.0722  0.275  0.5313  0.38
Schilhawsky 1960   18  0.7423  0.0026  0.0523  0.2626  0.4421  0.34
Shebanova 2002   12  0.7683  0.009  0.097  0.4917  0.379  0.43
Smith 1975   48  0.665  0.0052  0.0556  0.0525  0.2258  0.10
Sokolov 2002   38  0.6846  0.0019  0.0720  0.284  0.5014  0.37
Sztompka 1959   25  0.7184  0.0042  0.0629  0.2143  0.1344  0.17
Tomsic 1995   70  0.5585  0.0065  0.0384  0.0321  0.4355  0.11
Uninsky 1932   47  0.6686  0.0050  0.0555  0.0532  0.2854  0.12
Uninsky 1971   41  0.6887  0.0041  0.0534  0.1828  0.3833  0.26
Wasowski 1980   36  0.6988  0.0055  0.0647  0.0648  0.0771  0.06
Zak 1937   1  0.991  0.991  0.981  1.001  1.001  1.00
Zak 1951   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Random 1   90  -0.1732  0.0089  0.0189  0.0139  0.1189  0.03
Random 2   88  -0.0189  0.0088  0.0188  0.0123  0.2275  0.05
Random 3   89  -0.1490  0.0090  0.0190  0.0141  0.1482  0.04

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).