Neighaus 1950

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   26  0.3742  0.0030  0.0531  0.2534  0.2110  0.23
Anderszewski 2003   43  0.3381  0.0035  0.0934  0.1974  0.0339  0.08
Ashkenazy 1981   2  0.496  0.034  0.342  0.651  0.602  0.62
Bacha 2000   45  0.3349  0.0037  0.0536  0.1545  0.0636  0.09
Badura 1965   33  0.3517  0.0132  0.0628  0.2753  0.0625  0.13
Barbosa 1983   56  0.3060  0.0069  0.0559  0.0568  0.0556  0.05
Biret 1990   52  0.3240  0.0050  0.0556  0.0583  0.0366  0.04
Blet 2003   15  0.4224  0.0010  0.1510  0.526  0.478  0.49
Block 1995   62  0.2714  0.0124  0.0932  0.2358  0.0533  0.11
Blumental 1952   70  0.2587  0.0056  0.0469  0.0486  0.0381  0.03
Boshniakovich 1969   8  0.468  0.026  0.194  0.5960  0.0612  0.19
Brailowsky 1960   72  0.2588  0.0049  0.0647  0.0665  0.0551  0.05
Bunin 1987   48  0.3225  0.0036  0.0542  0.1141  0.1134  0.11
Bunin 1987b   60  0.2912  0.0162  0.0463  0.0444  0.1048  0.06
Chiu 1999   71  0.2562  0.0078  0.0373  0.0384  0.0284  0.02
Cohen 1997   68  0.2673  0.0061  0.0557  0.0584  0.0365  0.04
Cortot 1951   80  0.2250  0.0054  0.0558  0.0552  0.0749  0.06
Csalog 1996   78  0.2382  0.0076  0.0283  0.0285  0.0286  0.02
Czerny 1949   5  0.4818  0.0111  0.139  0.5443  0.159  0.28
Czerny 1990   7  0.4727  0.007  0.136  0.5762  0.0516  0.17
Duchoud 2007   84  0.2028  0.0083  0.0371  0.0357  0.0563  0.04
Ezaki 2006   79  0.2374  0.0085  0.0379  0.0381  0.0369  0.03
Falvay 1989   44  0.3363  0.0070  0.0645  0.0678  0.0454  0.05
Farrell 1958   30  0.3619  0.0043  0.0540  0.1166  0.0443  0.07
Ferenczy 1958   61  0.2838  0.0052  0.0553  0.0553  0.0657  0.05
Fliere 1977   40  0.3355  0.0038  0.0537  0.1376  0.0441  0.07
Fou 1978   27  0.3775  0.0022  0.0714  0.4562  0.0423  0.13
Francois 1956   10  0.447  0.029  0.127  0.553  0.565  0.55
Friedman 1923   9  0.4613  0.012  0.348  0.5513  0.526  0.53
Friedman 1923b   4  0.481  0.431  0.435  0.5910  0.544  0.56
Friedman 1930   34  0.3544  0.0034  0.0829  0.2642  0.1511  0.20
Garcia 2007   86  0.1737  0.0087  0.0378  0.0382  0.0287  0.02
Garcia 2007b   74  0.2489  0.0075  0.0282  0.0282  0.0289  0.02
Gierzod 1998   6  0.474  0.088  0.1313  0.4954  0.0615  0.17
Gornostaeva 1994   22  0.3836  0.0026  0.0730  0.2569  0.0338  0.09
Groot 1988   63  0.2710  0.0145  0.0646  0.0682  0.0367  0.04
Harasiewicz 1955   19  0.3941  0.0033  0.0733  0.2262  0.0535  0.10
Hatto 1993   38  0.3370  0.0015  0.1618  0.4357  0.0426  0.13
Hatto 1997   54  0.3290  0.0021  0.0923  0.3676  0.0429  0.12
Horowitz 1949   77  0.2451  0.0077  0.0372  0.0362  0.0562  0.04
Indjic 1988   42  0.3365  0.0016  0.1421  0.4179  0.0332  0.11
Kapell 1951   53  0.3266  0.0055  0.0468  0.0473  0.0374  0.03
Kissin 1993   3  0.493  0.095  0.243  0.6131  0.427  0.51
Kushner 1989   29  0.3771  0.0047  0.0649  0.0681  0.0359  0.04
Luisada 1991   57  0.3034  0.0059  0.0464  0.0478  0.0370  0.03
Lushtak 2004   11  0.4323  0.0012  0.1411  0.5263  0.0421  0.14
Malcuzynski 1961   39  0.3361  0.0060  0.0551  0.0578  0.0361  0.04
Magaloff 1978   32  0.3658  0.0039  0.0639  0.1267  0.0346  0.06
Magin 1975   37  0.3422  0.0041  0.0441  0.1168  0.0442  0.07
Michalowski 1933   83  0.2135  0.0080  0.0287  0.0239  0.1355  0.05
Milkina 1970   46  0.3376  0.0065  0.0555  0.0582  0.0360  0.04
Mohovich 1999   69  0.2577  0.0057  0.0461  0.0461  0.0464  0.04
Moravec 1969   66  0.2678  0.0074  0.0284  0.0283  0.0283  0.02
Morozova 2008   31  0.3656  0.0042  0.0638  0.1364  0.0540  0.08
Neighaus 1950   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Niedzielski 1931   65  0.2643  0.0066  0.0554  0.0548  0.0747  0.06
Ohlsson 1999   25  0.3746  0.0040  0.0543  0.1060  0.0544  0.07
Osinska 1989   36  0.3439  0.0063  0.0465  0.0486  0.0271  0.03
Pachmann 1927   51  0.3257  0.0048  0.0648  0.0630  0.3120  0.14
Paderewski 1930   21  0.3926  0.0013  0.1712  0.503  0.663  0.57
Perlemuter 1992   41  0.3321  0.0053  0.0462  0.0445  0.0750  0.05
Pierdomenico 2008   64  0.2732  0.0072  0.0375  0.0378  0.0373  0.03
Poblocka 1999   47  0.3220  0.0029  0.0635  0.1976  0.0437  0.09
Rabcewiczowa 1932   24  0.3731  0.0023  0.0816  0.4373  0.0330  0.11
Rachmaninoff 1923   73  0.2533  0.0051  0.0650  0.0672  0.0453  0.05
Rangell 2001   16  0.4011  0.0127  0.0825  0.3543  0.1013  0.19
Richter 1976   13  0.425  0.0417  0.1124  0.3656  0.0428  0.12
Rosen 1989   58  0.3083  0.0071  0.0281  0.0263  0.0480  0.03
Rosenthal 1930   50  0.3254  0.0044  0.0544  0.0938  0.2024  0.13
Rosenthal 1931   85  0.1979  0.0079  0.0377  0.0376  0.0477  0.03
Rosenthal 1931b   81  0.2230  0.0073  0.0380  0.0360  0.0482  0.03
Rosenthal 1931c   67  0.2648  0.0068  0.0467  0.0469  0.0468  0.04
Rosenthal 1931d   87  0.1572  0.0086  0.0374  0.0385  0.0288  0.02
Rossi 2007   75  0.2467  0.0082  0.0376  0.0377  0.0372  0.03
Rubinstein 1939   23  0.3815  0.0125  0.0822  0.3771  0.0427  0.12
Rubinstein 1952   18  0.4084  0.0020  0.1020  0.4254  0.0619  0.16
Rubinstein 1966   14  0.4285  0.0019  0.0819  0.4352  0.0617  0.16
Schilhawsky 1960   49  0.329  0.0264  0.0460  0.0476  0.0378  0.03
Shebanova 2002   12  0.4329  0.0014  0.1515  0.4449  0.0618  0.16
Smith 1975   35  0.3516  0.0118  0.0817  0.4352  0.0714  0.17
Sokolov 2002   28  0.3768  0.0046  0.0552  0.0556  0.0552  0.05
Sztompka 1959   1  0.542  0.133  0.281  0.736  0.681  0.70
Tomsic 1995   82  0.2152  0.0084  0.0286  0.0282  0.0385  0.02
Uninsky 1932   76  0.2447  0.0081  0.0285  0.0268  0.0479  0.03
Uninsky 1971   17  0.4059  0.0031  0.0726  0.3277  0.0431  0.11
Wasowski 1980   20  0.3945  0.0028  0.0827  0.3266  0.0522  0.13
Zak 1937   55  0.3186  0.0058  0.0466  0.0482  0.0375  0.03
Zak 1951   59  0.3080  0.0067  0.0470  0.0487  0.0276  0.03
Random 1   88  -0.0153  0.0088  0.0289  0.0226  0.2845  0.07
Random 2   90  -0.0864  0.0090  0.0190  0.0188  0.0190  0.01
Random 3   89  -0.0669  0.0089  0.0288  0.0243  0.1258  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).