Rangell 2001

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   77  0.2478  0.0080  0.0477  0.0474  0.0381  0.03
Anderszewski 2003   31  0.4373  0.0026  0.1120  0.4660  0.0634  0.17
Ashkenazy 1981   60  0.3468  0.0071  0.0475  0.0479  0.0382  0.03
Bacha 2000   62  0.3443  0.0042  0.0642  0.1125  0.3224  0.19
Badura 1965   74  0.2586  0.0069  0.0381  0.0388  0.0286  0.02
Barbosa 1983   18  0.4749  0.0019  0.0813  0.5350  0.0822  0.21
Biret 1990   47  0.3961  0.0054  0.0657  0.0682  0.0377  0.04
Blet 2003   71  0.2639  0.0076  0.0659  0.0684  0.0371  0.04
Block 1995   55  0.3654  0.0056  0.0847  0.0855  0.0557  0.06
Blumental 1952   61  0.3435  0.0060  0.0661  0.0674  0.0468  0.05
Boshniakovich 1969   27  0.4421  0.0010  0.1015  0.5256  0.0630  0.18
Brailowsky 1960   84  0.1879  0.0087  0.0287  0.0282  0.0383  0.02
Bunin 1987   40  0.4016  0.0135  0.0639  0.2033  0.1825  0.19
Bunin 1987b   53  0.3741  0.0044  0.0543  0.1037  0.1844  0.13
Chiu 1999   67  0.3262  0.0065  0.0749  0.0750  0.0656  0.06
Cohen 1997   41  0.4029  0.0050  0.0662  0.0614  0.3242  0.14
Cortot 1951   35  0.4311  0.0222  0.1129  0.366  0.657  0.48
Csalog 1996   78  0.2482  0.0070  0.0476  0.0473  0.0470  0.04
Czerny 1949   1  0.601  0.331  0.322  0.7720  0.641  0.70
Czerny 1990   8  0.5224  0.009  0.129  0.5941  0.2214  0.36
Duchoud 2007   57  0.3614  0.0159  0.0655  0.0621  0.4735  0.17
Ezaki 2006   25  0.4515  0.0118  0.1019  0.4853  0.0631  0.17
Falvay 1989   22  0.4676  0.0032  0.0731  0.3369  0.0445  0.11
Farrell 1958   10  0.512  0.173  0.226  0.6613  0.592  0.62
Ferenczy 1958   76  0.2450  0.0077  0.0474  0.0473  0.0473  0.04
Fliere 1977   63  0.3483  0.0064  0.0660  0.0675  0.0460  0.05
Fou 1978   45  0.3944  0.0055  0.0651  0.0669  0.0464  0.05
Francois 1956   54  0.3645  0.0052  0.0748  0.0742  0.1648  0.11
Friedman 1923   73  0.2640  0.0074  0.0656  0.0650  0.0658  0.06
Friedman 1923b   70  0.2666  0.0068  0.0480  0.0458  0.0576  0.04
Friedman 1930   72  0.2669  0.0075  0.0650  0.0683  0.0372  0.04
Garcia 2007   48  0.3887  0.0053  0.0658  0.0627  0.3837  0.15
Garcia 2007b   36  0.4257  0.0029  0.1130  0.3634  0.3015  0.33
Gierzod 1998   3  0.5334  0.0015  0.0817  0.5156  0.0536  0.16
Gornostaeva 1994   24  0.4513  0.0124  0.0824  0.4239  0.1818  0.27
Groot 1988   75  0.2458  0.0073  0.0572  0.0572  0.0478  0.04
Harasiewicz 1955   5  0.5220  0.008  0.138  0.6041  0.2413  0.38
Hatto 1993   50  0.3738  0.0040  0.0836  0.2285  0.0352  0.08
Hatto 1997   51  0.3784  0.0039  0.0737  0.2287  0.0350  0.08
Horowitz 1949   83  0.1855  0.0086  0.0285  0.0286  0.0284  0.02
Indjic 1988   49  0.3846  0.0038  0.0734  0.2479  0.0349  0.08
Kapell 1951   17  0.4712  0.0127  0.1026  0.3949  0.0732  0.17
Kissin 1993   11  0.5042  0.0014  0.1010  0.5530  0.426  0.48
Kushner 1989   4  0.538  0.036  0.245  0.6643  0.2312  0.39
Luisada 1991   64  0.3365  0.0067  0.0569  0.0575  0.0469  0.04
Lushtak 2004   14  0.497  0.037  0.137  0.6233  0.358  0.47
Malcuzynski 1961   6  0.524  0.045  0.303  0.6821  0.484  0.57
Magaloff 1978   46  0.3928  0.0057  0.0846  0.0872  0.0362  0.05
Magin 1975   42  0.4070  0.0037  0.0638  0.2145  0.1039  0.14
Michalowski 1933   87  0.1380  0.0078  0.0478  0.0441  0.1255  0.07
Milkina 1970   16  0.4785  0.0017  0.0816  0.5251  0.0628  0.18
Mohovich 1999   58  0.3627  0.0058  0.0653  0.0683  0.0375  0.04
Moravec 1969   28  0.4430  0.0048  0.0570  0.0562  0.0559  0.05
Morozova 2008   21  0.4623  0.0011  0.1112  0.5326  0.3610  0.44
Neighaus 1950   43  0.4022  0.0043  0.0544  0.1026  0.3526  0.19
Niedzielski 1931   79  0.1988  0.0079  0.0479  0.0479  0.0380  0.03
Ohlsson 1999   30  0.4356  0.0034  0.0635  0.2448  0.0547  0.11
Osinska 1989   20  0.4737  0.0016  0.0814  0.5351  0.0627  0.18
Pachmann 1927   65  0.3352  0.0046  0.0565  0.0527  0.3741  0.14
Paderewski 1930   68  0.3232  0.0047  0.0652  0.068  0.5629  0.18
Perlemuter 1992   52  0.3751  0.0062  0.0566  0.0544  0.1053  0.07
Pierdomenico 2008   56  0.3663  0.0061  0.0564  0.0538  0.2646  0.11
Poblocka 1999   32  0.4374  0.0049  0.0568  0.0562  0.0661  0.05
Rabcewiczowa 1932   34  0.4348  0.0033  0.0633  0.2848  0.0643  0.13
Rachmaninoff 1923   82  0.1977  0.0081  0.0473  0.0487  0.0279  0.03
Rangell 2001   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Richter 1976   23  0.4636  0.0028  0.1432  0.3236  0.2617  0.29
Rosen 1989   66  0.3331  0.0066  0.0571  0.0570  0.0474  0.04
Rosenthal 1930   81  0.1918  0.0189  0.0288  0.0288  0.0191  0.01
Rosenthal 1931   85  0.1759  0.0084  0.0283  0.0286  0.0285  0.02
Rosenthal 1931b   86  0.1589  0.0085  0.0286  0.0283  0.0289  0.02
Rosenthal 1931c   80  0.1971  0.0082  0.0382  0.0388  0.0290  0.02
Rosenthal 1931d   88  0.1390  0.0088  0.0289  0.0289  0.0288  0.02
Rossi 2007   26  0.4419  0.0125  0.1023  0.445  0.545  0.49
Rubinstein 1939   7  0.526  0.044  0.274  0.6713  0.533  0.60
Rubinstein 1952   15  0.4817  0.0112  0.0821  0.4659  0.0538  0.15
Rubinstein 1966   12  0.5033  0.0013  0.0911  0.5347  0.0823  0.21
Schilhawsky 1960   59  0.3553  0.0063  0.0654  0.0670  0.0466  0.05
Shebanova 2002   19  0.4710  0.0323  0.1025  0.4033  0.2616  0.32
Smith 1975   69  0.3072  0.0072  0.0567  0.0558  0.0563  0.05
Sokolov 2002   39  0.4126  0.0036  0.0540  0.1939  0.2521  0.22
Sztompka 1959   9  0.519  0.0321  0.1222  0.4427  0.449  0.44
Tomsic 1995   37  0.4160  0.0045  0.0545  0.1071  0.0554  0.07
Uninsky 1932   44  0.3925  0.0041  0.0741  0.1731  0.3619  0.25
Uninsky 1971   38  0.4191  0.0051  0.0663  0.0661  0.0565  0.05
Wasowski 1980   13  0.495  0.0420  0.1018  0.4932  0.3411  0.41
Zak 1937   29  0.4464  0.0031  0.0927  0.3851  0.0540  0.14
Zak 1951   33  0.4347  0.0030  0.0728  0.3744  0.0833  0.17
Average   2  0.603  0.102  0.291  0.7855  0.0720  0.23
Random 1   90  -0.0275  0.0083  0.0284  0.0221  0.3451  0.08
Random 2   89  0.0667  0.0090  0.0190  0.0128  0.2367  0.05
Random 3   91  -0.0481  0.0091  0.0191  0.0150  0.0587  0.02

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).