Cortot 1951

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   66  0.2160  0.0067  0.0464  0.0486  0.0369  0.03
Anderszewski 2003   23  0.3429  0.0028  0.0723  0.4461  0.0621  0.16
Ashkenazy 1981   64  0.2126  0.0078  0.0371  0.0353  0.0470  0.03
Bacha 2000   17  0.3621  0.0122  0.1321  0.4530  0.308  0.37
Badura 1965   79  0.1545  0.0083  0.0285  0.0283  0.0286  0.02
Barbosa 1983   10  0.409  0.0414  0.1024  0.4142  0.1715  0.26
Biret 1990   19  0.3524  0.0027  0.0629  0.3475  0.0343  0.10
Blet 2003   70  0.1866  0.0084  0.0283  0.0286  0.0284  0.02
Block 1995   41  0.2938  0.0044  0.0842  0.2137  0.2018  0.20
Blumental 1952   12  0.397  0.0513  0.109  0.6241  0.1713  0.32
Boshniakovich 1969   47  0.2758  0.0038  0.0840  0.2371  0.0347  0.08
Brailowsky 1960   35  0.3175  0.0045  0.1044  0.2147  0.0730  0.12
Bunin 1987   65  0.2181  0.0070  0.0374  0.0387  0.0371  0.03
Bunin 1987b   74  0.1769  0.0075  0.0280  0.0285  0.0380  0.02
Chiu 1999   75  0.1752  0.0071  0.0373  0.0388  0.0277  0.02
Cohen 1997   37  0.3032  0.0032  0.0730  0.3353  0.0437  0.11
Cortot 1951   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Csalog 1996   78  0.1582  0.0073  0.0376  0.0385  0.0283  0.02
Czerny 1949   1  0.481  0.231  0.231  0.7633  0.441  0.58
Czerny 1990   16  0.3730  0.0021  0.1514  0.5168  0.0427  0.14
Duchoud 2007   87  0.0933  0.0059  0.0365  0.0383  0.0285  0.02
Ezaki 2006   24  0.3453  0.0042  0.0738  0.2565  0.0534  0.11
Falvay 1989   55  0.2383  0.0065  0.0368  0.0388  0.0278  0.02
Farrell 1958   6  0.446  0.057  0.214  0.6938  0.256  0.42
Ferenczy 1958   52  0.2470  0.0062  0.0561  0.0581  0.0358  0.04
Fliere 1977   30  0.3256  0.0034  0.0932  0.3285  0.0338  0.10
Fou 1978   18  0.3655  0.0026  0.0722  0.4581  0.0331  0.12
Francois 1956   48  0.2776  0.0053  0.0748  0.0756  0.0552  0.06
Friedman 1923   84  0.1284  0.0086  0.0284  0.0282  0.0474  0.03
Friedman 1923b   86  0.0972  0.0088  0.0288  0.0281  0.0388  0.02
Friedman 1930   91  0.0061  0.0091  0.0191  0.0189  0.0291  0.01
Garcia 2007   63  0.2187  0.0055  0.0846  0.0857  0.0550  0.06
Garcia 2007b   56  0.2277  0.0046  0.0655  0.0667  0.0556  0.05
Gierzod 1998   46  0.2788  0.0054  0.0654  0.0685  0.0359  0.04
Gornostaeva 1994   33  0.3151  0.0052  0.0747  0.0776  0.0354  0.05
Groot 1988   42  0.2939  0.0031  0.0633  0.3182  0.0344  0.10
Harasiewicz 1955   9  0.4116  0.0116  0.1311  0.5853  0.0620  0.19
Hatto 1993   20  0.3562  0.0018  0.1016  0.4756  0.0523  0.15
Hatto 1997   22  0.3428  0.0020  0.1320  0.4674  0.0426  0.14
Horowitz 1949   83  0.1349  0.0087  0.0287  0.0278  0.0381  0.02
Indjic 1988   21  0.3559  0.0019  0.1017  0.4770  0.0424  0.14
Kapell 1951   32  0.3213  0.0212  0.1115  0.5041  0.2012  0.32
Kissin 1993   44  0.2919  0.0125  0.0743  0.2158  0.0540  0.10
Kushner 1989   39  0.2922  0.0137  0.0839  0.2472  0.0439  0.10
Luisada 1991   67  0.2114  0.0157  0.0556  0.0578  0.0357  0.04
Lushtak 2004   31  0.3218  0.0143  0.0841  0.2366  0.0441  0.10
Malcuzynski 1961   2  0.478  0.042  0.122  0.7340  0.237  0.41
Magaloff 1978   5  0.452  0.115  0.1210  0.6153  0.0619  0.19
Magin 1975   62  0.2167  0.0076  0.0369  0.0376  0.0363  0.03
Michalowski 1933   80  0.1473  0.0080  0.0370  0.0370  0.0368  0.03
Milkina 1970   25  0.3378  0.0033  0.0628  0.3573  0.0432  0.12
Mohovich 1999   57  0.2254  0.0050  0.0557  0.0565  0.0460  0.04
Moravec 1969   54  0.2371  0.0066  0.0367  0.0390  0.0275  0.02
Morozova 2008   43  0.2923  0.0148  0.0652  0.0661  0.0553  0.05
Neighaus 1950   60  0.2243  0.0051  0.0653  0.0659  0.0555  0.05
Niedzielski 1931   76  0.1640  0.0081  0.0379  0.0382  0.0279  0.02
Ohlsson 1999   50  0.2636  0.0058  0.0560  0.0584  0.0267  0.03
Osinska 1989   26  0.3385  0.0029  0.0725  0.4073  0.0428  0.13
Pachmann 1927   88  0.0868  0.0090  0.0190  0.0182  0.0290  0.01
Paderewski 1930   61  0.2215  0.0123  0.0731  0.3321  0.3610  0.34
Perlemuter 1992   85  0.1063  0.0089  0.0289  0.0287  0.0276  0.02
Pierdomenico 2008   72  0.1825  0.0047  0.0749  0.0755  0.0549  0.06
Poblocka 1999   11  0.393  0.104  0.1712  0.5630  0.345  0.44
Rabcewiczowa 1932   38  0.3027  0.0030  0.0626  0.3881  0.0335  0.11
Rachmaninoff 1923   14  0.395  0.0517  0.1118  0.4641  0.1316  0.24
Rangell 2001   8  0.4341  0.009  0.126  0.6529  0.364  0.48
Richter 1976   28  0.3334  0.0015  0.1127  0.3733  0.2911  0.33
Rosen 1989   69  0.1886  0.0074  0.0282  0.0288  0.0287  0.02
Rosenthal 1930   45  0.2837  0.0056  0.0750  0.0751  0.0551  0.06
Rosenthal 1931   71  0.1889  0.0077  0.0378  0.0382  0.0282  0.02
Rosenthal 1931b   82  0.1364  0.0068  0.0372  0.0387  0.0289  0.02
Rosenthal 1931c   59  0.2290  0.0063  0.0558  0.0587  0.0273  0.03
Rosenthal 1931d   53  0.2374  0.0061  0.0462  0.0476  0.0372  0.03
Rossi 2007   73  0.1850  0.0060  0.0463  0.0485  0.0262  0.03
Rubinstein 1939   13  0.3911  0.0310  0.168  0.6339  0.189  0.34
Rubinstein 1952   40  0.2947  0.0039  0.0737  0.2568  0.0445  0.10
Rubinstein 1966   27  0.3346  0.0024  0.0619  0.4666  0.0522  0.15
Schilhawsky 1960   3  0.4512  0.036  0.153  0.7231  0.373  0.52
Shebanova 2002   34  0.3117  0.0135  0.0736  0.2559  0.0536  0.11
Smith 1975   49  0.2765  0.0049  0.0751  0.0761  0.0548  0.06
Sokolov 2002   51  0.2448  0.0064  0.0559  0.0588  0.0261  0.03
Sztompka 1959   7  0.434  0.083  0.145  0.6724  0.472  0.56
Tomsic 1995   77  0.1535  0.0085  0.0281  0.0275  0.0466  0.03
Uninsky 1932   36  0.3144  0.0036  0.1034  0.3073  0.0346  0.09
Uninsky 1971   15  0.3857  0.0011  0.1113  0.5546  0.0717  0.20
Wasowski 1980   29  0.3231  0.0041  0.0735  0.2658  0.0629  0.12
Zak 1937   58  0.2279  0.0069  0.0375  0.0386  0.0364  0.03
Zak 1951   68  0.2180  0.0072  0.0366  0.0387  0.0365  0.03
Average   4  0.4510  0.038  0.177  0.6487  0.0325  0.14
Random 1   90  0.0291  0.0082  0.0286  0.025  0.5242  0.10
Random 2   81  0.1342  0.0079  0.0377  0.036  0.4833  0.12
Random 3   89  0.0620  0.0140  0.0745  0.131  0.6014  0.28

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).