Chiu 1999

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   28  0.6618  0.0141  0.0538  0.1850  0.0544  0.09
Anderszewski 2003   25  0.677  0.0313  0.0617  0.3035  0.2214  0.26
Ashkenazy 1981   16  0.7034  0.0022  0.0610  0.3832  0.2211  0.29
Bacha 2000   7  0.7312  0.025  0.099  0.404  0.483  0.44
Badura 1965   35  0.6180  0.0073  0.0458  0.0452  0.0663  0.05
Barbosa 1983   2  0.771  0.181  0.172  0.501  0.681  0.58
Biret 1990   20  0.6838  0.0031  0.0523  0.2544  0.0936  0.15
Blet 2003   51  0.5673  0.0067  0.0378  0.0350  0.0762  0.05
Block 1995   49  0.572  0.113  0.1027  0.2416  0.2915  0.26
Blumental 1952   8  0.734  0.094  0.0911  0.3515  0.2510  0.30
Boshniakovich 1969   68  0.4753  0.0074  0.0449  0.0464  0.0572  0.04
Brailowsky 1960   6  0.7314  0.026  0.108  0.418  0.512  0.46
Bunin 1987   76  0.3855  0.0079  0.0376  0.0352  0.0673  0.04
Bunin 1987b   79  0.3668  0.0078  0.0367  0.0351  0.0758  0.05
Chiu 1999   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Cohen 1997   32  0.6536  0.0066  0.0375  0.0332  0.2645  0.09
Cortot 1951   53  0.5526  0.0171  0.0448  0.0470  0.0476  0.04
Csalog 1996   81  0.336  0.0327  0.0637  0.1826  0.2822  0.22
Czerny 1949   65  0.5084  0.0076  0.0377  0.0365  0.0486  0.03
Czerny 1990   22  0.6842  0.0020  0.0525  0.2442  0.1035  0.15
Duchoud 2007   59  0.5241  0.0052  0.0460  0.0444  0.1152  0.07
Ezaki 2006   1  0.808  0.037  0.093  0.4615  0.414  0.43
Falvay 1989   34  0.6227  0.0139  0.0543  0.1430  0.4117  0.24
Farrell 1958   13  0.7159  0.0032  0.0620  0.2841  0.1721  0.22
Ferenczy 1958   43  0.5947  0.0047  0.0451  0.0439  0.1056  0.06
Fliere 1977   37  0.6145  0.0045  0.0645  0.1260  0.0447  0.07
Fou 1978   24  0.6751  0.0043  0.0642  0.1452  0.0450  0.07
Francois 1956   58  0.5249  0.0060  0.0456  0.0469  0.0477  0.04
Friedman 1923   12  0.725  0.0614  0.0624  0.2541  0.2616  0.25
Friedman 1923b   14  0.7125  0.0116  0.0530  0.2341  0.2420  0.23
Friedman 1930   19  0.7023  0.0138  0.0539  0.1542  0.2329  0.19
Garcia 2007   42  0.5962  0.0069  0.0381  0.0357  0.0571  0.04
Garcia 2007b   54  0.5528  0.0165  0.0384  0.0361  0.0489  0.03
Gierzod 1998   64  0.5037  0.0053  0.0457  0.0471  0.0470  0.04
Gornostaeva 1994   70  0.4643  0.0058  0.0364  0.0359  0.0574  0.04
Groot 1988   33  0.6330  0.0112  0.0718  0.2920  0.398  0.34
Harasiewicz 1955   9  0.7220  0.0115  0.0531  0.2366  0.0539  0.11
Hatto 1993   15  0.7085  0.0035  0.0832  0.2339  0.1727  0.20
Hatto 1997   10  0.7213  0.0234  0.0926  0.2440  0.1726  0.20
Horowitz 1949   63  0.5163  0.0080  0.0452  0.0466  0.0565  0.04
Indjic 1988   11  0.7281  0.0033  0.0528  0.2440  0.1724  0.20
Kapell 1951   67  0.4722  0.019  0.1012  0.3450  0.0538  0.13
Kissin 1993   57  0.5375  0.0059  0.0546  0.0565  0.0366  0.04
Kushner 1989   39  0.6040  0.0037  0.0634  0.2141  0.1232  0.16
Luisada 1991   4  0.769  0.038  0.104  0.4523  0.305  0.37
Lushtak 2004   3  0.7632  0.0121  0.0616  0.3031  0.1819  0.23
Malcuzynski 1961   83  0.2764  0.0081  0.0386  0.0382  0.0381  0.03
Magaloff 1978   55  0.5521  0.0154  0.0459  0.0447  0.0854  0.06
Magin 1975   61  0.5115  0.0224  0.0715  0.3336  0.1818  0.24
Michalowski 1933   75  0.4070  0.0077  0.0371  0.0371  0.0484  0.03
Milkina 1970   52  0.5665  0.0050  0.0450  0.0473  0.0380  0.03
Mohovich 1999   26  0.6731  0.0110  0.1014  0.3328  0.377  0.35
Moravec 1969   66  0.4857  0.0049  0.0374  0.0331  0.2543  0.09
Morozova 2008   21  0.6829  0.0123  0.0722  0.2639  0.1625  0.20
Neighaus 1950   45  0.5811  0.0329  0.0844  0.1345  0.0842  0.10
Niedzielski 1931   60  0.5288  0.0048  0.0454  0.0481  0.0379  0.03
Ohlsson 1999   48  0.5739  0.0028  0.0633  0.2142  0.1331  0.17
Osinska 1989   40  0.6077  0.0055  0.0369  0.0364  0.0478  0.03
Pachmann 1927   62  0.5161  0.0082  0.0385  0.0368  0.0383  0.03
Paderewski 1930   56  0.5454  0.0070  0.0366  0.0369  0.0382  0.03
Perlemuter 1992   18  0.7058  0.0042  0.0541  0.1467  0.0448  0.07
Pierdomenico 2008   78  0.3652  0.0072  0.0362  0.0344  0.1355  0.06
Poblocka 1999   77  0.3866  0.0057  0.0363  0.0362  0.0564  0.04
Rabcewiczowa 1932   36  0.6172  0.0017  0.0521  0.2735  0.1428  0.19
Rachmaninoff 1923   29  0.6674  0.0040  0.0635  0.1941  0.1137  0.14
Rangell 2001   82  0.2778  0.0063  0.0461  0.0436  0.1946  0.09
Richter 1976   80  0.3582  0.0083  0.0453  0.0456  0.0659  0.05
Rosen 1989   47  0.5733  0.0036  0.0629  0.2372  0.0440  0.10
Rosenthal 1930   85  0.2483  0.0084  0.0370  0.0388  0.0290  0.02
Rosenthal 1931   87  0.2379  0.0085  0.0287  0.0271  0.0485  0.03
Rosenthal 1931b   86  0.2491  0.0086  0.0289  0.0272  0.0487  0.03
Rosenthal 1931c   88  0.1971  0.0088  0.0373  0.0371  0.0488  0.03
Rosenthal 1931d   84  0.2589  0.0087  0.0383  0.0362  0.0575  0.04
Rossi 2007   31  0.6517  0.0151  0.0372  0.0334  0.1749  0.07
Rubinstein 1939   38  0.6160  0.0064  0.0379  0.0343  0.1057  0.05
Rubinstein 1952   72  0.4669  0.0030  0.0436  0.1940  0.2523  0.22
Rubinstein 1966   17  0.7024  0.0125  0.0619  0.2920  0.389  0.33
Schilhawsky 1960   69  0.4756  0.0075  0.0382  0.0353  0.0667  0.04
Shebanova 2002   41  0.5919  0.0126  0.0613  0.3444  0.1030  0.18
Smith 1975   50  0.5767  0.0044  0.0640  0.1436  0.1633  0.15
Sokolov 2002   71  0.4635  0.0056  0.0368  0.0345  0.1153  0.06
Sztompka 1959   44  0.5950  0.0046  0.0547  0.0552  0.0660  0.05
Tomsic 1995   73  0.4448  0.0068  0.0380  0.0340  0.1751  0.07
Uninsky 1932   46  0.5844  0.0061  0.0365  0.0357  0.0668  0.04
Uninsky 1971   74  0.4210  0.0362  0.0455  0.0458  0.0661  0.05
Wasowski 1980   23  0.6716  0.0211  0.077  0.4317  0.316  0.37
Zak 1937   27  0.6746  0.0019  0.096  0.4539  0.1513  0.26
Zak 1951   30  0.6576  0.0018  0.065  0.4539  0.1612  0.27
Average   5  0.753  0.102  0.121  0.5971  0.0434  0.15
Random 1   91  -0.3086  0.0091  0.0191  0.0187  0.0291  0.01
Random 2   89  -0.0187  0.0090  0.0290  0.0240  0.0969  0.04
Random 3   90  -0.0890  0.0089  0.0288  0.026  0.5441  0.10

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).