Csalog 1996

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   64  0.3640  0.0070  0.0478  0.0463  0.0477  0.04
Anderszewski 2003   34  0.4456  0.0047  0.0746  0.0757  0.0659  0.06
Ashkenazy 1981   69  0.3273  0.0073  0.0475  0.0455  0.0478  0.04
Bacha 2000   70  0.3251  0.0068  0.0474  0.0450  0.0571  0.04
Badura 1965   31  0.4510  0.0141  0.0638  0.1814  0.4527  0.28
Barbosa 1983   48  0.4074  0.0053  0.0561  0.0546  0.0956  0.07
Biret 1990   19  0.4815  0.0123  0.0820  0.3537  0.2328  0.28
Blet 2003   32  0.456  0.0224  0.0918  0.395  0.5113  0.45
Block 1995   42  0.4220  0.0011  0.1124  0.3423  0.4318  0.38
Blumental 1952   44  0.4157  0.0027  0.0732  0.2337  0.2336  0.23
Boshniakovich 1969   22  0.4722  0.0028  0.0922  0.3445  0.0939  0.17
Brailowsky 1960   43  0.4166  0.0059  0.0563  0.0562  0.0663  0.05
Bunin 1987   49  0.4067  0.0055  0.0468  0.0438  0.1458  0.07
Bunin 1987b   52  0.3982  0.0054  0.0556  0.0529  0.2847  0.12
Chiu 1999   46  0.4168  0.0052  0.0555  0.0521  0.3444  0.13
Cohen 1997   78  0.2714  0.0167  0.0477  0.0438  0.1257  0.07
Cortot 1951   86  0.1583  0.0086  0.0285  0.0276  0.0391  0.02
Csalog 1996   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Czerny 1949   75  0.3162  0.0077  0.0552  0.0562  0.0569  0.05
Czerny 1990   35  0.4469  0.0032  0.0633  0.2355  0.0648  0.12
Duchoud 2007   77  0.2848  0.0078  0.0557  0.0537  0.3245  0.13
Ezaki 2006   15  0.5155  0.0020  0.1214  0.4733  0.2520  0.34
Falvay 1989   1  0.661  0.531  0.521  0.823  0.761  0.79
Farrell 1958   73  0.3187  0.0076  0.0476  0.0455  0.0573  0.04
Ferenczy 1958   3  0.613  0.073  0.323  0.692  0.782  0.73
Fliere 1977   4  0.557  0.0213  0.146  0.6125  0.439  0.51
Fou 1978   27  0.4616  0.0017  0.0821  0.3528  0.2823  0.31
Francois 1956   85  0.1949  0.0081  0.0383  0.0378  0.0385  0.03
Friedman 1923   83  0.2179  0.0085  0.0479  0.0485  0.0386  0.03
Friedman 1923b   84  0.2184  0.0084  0.0287  0.0278  0.0484  0.03
Friedman 1930   74  0.3132  0.0074  0.0470  0.0456  0.0666  0.05
Garcia 2007   37  0.4318  0.0026  0.0829  0.306  0.6314  0.43
Garcia 2007b   62  0.3746  0.0057  0.0562  0.0547  0.0670  0.05
Gierzod 1998   8  0.5427  0.006  0.118  0.6027  0.3611  0.46
Gornostaeva 1994   25  0.4663  0.0018  0.1119  0.3525  0.4019  0.37
Groot 1988   20  0.4885  0.0035  0.0631  0.2329  0.2437  0.23
Harasiewicz 1955   24  0.4675  0.0029  0.0728  0.3248  0.0741  0.15
Hatto 1993   30  0.4534  0.0022  0.0825  0.3336  0.2330  0.28
Hatto 1997   17  0.488  0.019  0.1215  0.4731  0.3617  0.41
Horowitz 1949   79  0.2758  0.0083  0.0382  0.0367  0.0481  0.03
Indjic 1988   23  0.4737  0.0015  0.1316  0.4134  0.2921  0.34
Kapell 1951   7  0.544  0.034  0.2510  0.5421  0.537  0.53
Kissin 1993   33  0.4424  0.0031  0.0634  0.2335  0.3926  0.30
Kushner 1989   14  0.5113  0.0116  0.1013  0.5144  0.1924  0.31
Luisada 1991   65  0.3680  0.0062  0.0465  0.0446  0.0761  0.05
Lushtak 2004   26  0.4643  0.0037  0.0635  0.2150  0.0551  0.10
Malcuzynski 1961   47  0.4031  0.0038  0.0640  0.1660  0.0552  0.09
Magaloff 1978   57  0.3828  0.0069  0.0560  0.0563  0.0472  0.04
Magin 1975   10  0.5426  0.0014  0.1311  0.5415  0.546  0.54
Michalowski 1933   88  0.1388  0.0087  0.0284  0.0245  0.0975  0.04
Milkina 1970   40  0.4230  0.0044  0.0644  0.1166  0.0555  0.07
Mohovich 1999   12  0.525  0.035  0.184  0.6612  0.583  0.62
Moravec 1969   18  0.4821  0.0034  0.0630  0.2735  0.2032  0.23
Morozova 2008   54  0.3976  0.0051  0.0648  0.0636  0.1650  0.10
Neighaus 1950   82  0.2389  0.0082  0.0286  0.0284  0.0290  0.02
Niedzielski 1931   68  0.3247  0.0046  0.0647  0.0613  0.4340  0.16
Ohlsson 1999   72  0.3164  0.0065  0.0558  0.0566  0.0474  0.04
Osinska 1989   5  0.5559  0.007  0.135  0.6628  0.495  0.57
Pachmann 1927   71  0.3252  0.0075  0.0380  0.0328  0.3649  0.10
Paderewski 1930   87  0.1453  0.0088  0.0288  0.0279  0.0387  0.02
Perlemuter 1992   50  0.3961  0.0061  0.0467  0.0423  0.3846  0.12
Pierdomenico 2008   51  0.3919  0.0033  0.0537  0.1923  0.4825  0.30
Poblocka 1999   38  0.4335  0.0021  0.0826  0.3343  0.1633  0.23
Rabcewiczowa 1932   58  0.3877  0.0050  0.0550  0.0547  0.0665  0.05
Rachmaninoff 1923   61  0.3770  0.0058  0.0649  0.0671  0.0464  0.05
Rangell 2001   81  0.2486  0.0080  0.0473  0.0476  0.0479  0.04
Richter 1976   41  0.4272  0.0048  0.0554  0.0545  0.1253  0.08
Rosen 1989   28  0.4623  0.0036  0.0636  0.1933  0.2935  0.23
Rosenthal 1930   66  0.3578  0.0072  0.0464  0.0440  0.1654  0.08
Rosenthal 1931   45  0.4142  0.0042  0.0643  0.1313  0.5031  0.25
Rosenthal 1931b   29  0.4512  0.0140  0.0639  0.188  0.5822  0.32
Rosenthal 1931c   21  0.4736  0.0025  0.0823  0.3411  0.6312  0.46
Rosenthal 1931d   36  0.4471  0.0043  0.0742  0.1411  0.5729  0.28
Rossi 2007   56  0.3841  0.0045  0.0545  0.1111  0.4834  0.23
Rubinstein 1939   55  0.3844  0.0060  0.0472  0.0475  0.0380  0.03
Rubinstein 1952   16  0.4939  0.0030  0.0727  0.3249  0.0742  0.15
Rubinstein 1966   6  0.5538  0.008  0.147  0.6132  0.4210  0.51
Schilhawsky 1960   67  0.3481  0.0066  0.0381  0.0362  0.0483  0.03
Shebanova 2002   53  0.3990  0.0056  0.0559  0.0553  0.0568  0.05
Smith 1975   60  0.3729  0.0039  0.0641  0.1643  0.1938  0.17
Sokolov 2002   39  0.4317  0.0049  0.0551  0.0532  0.3343  0.13
Sztompka 1959   80  0.2565  0.0079  0.0469  0.0481  0.0382  0.03
Tomsic 1995   9  0.5411  0.0110  0.129  0.564  0.634  0.59
Uninsky 1932   76  0.3150  0.0064  0.0466  0.0449  0.0667  0.05
Uninsky 1971   59  0.3754  0.0071  0.0471  0.0474  0.0476  0.04
Wasowski 1980   63  0.3633  0.0063  0.0553  0.0559  0.0662  0.05
Zak 1937   13  0.5145  0.0019  0.1217  0.4021  0.4415  0.42
Zak 1951   11  0.549  0.0112  0.1312  0.5116  0.558  0.53
Average   2  0.642  0.172  0.432  0.7837  0.2316  0.42
Random 1   90  -0.1060  0.0090  0.0190  0.0163  0.0389  0.02
Random 2   91  -0.1291  0.0091  0.0191  0.0182  0.0388  0.02
Random 3   89  -0.0525  0.0089  0.0289  0.0238  0.1860  0.06

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).