Schilhawsky 1960

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   29  0.4634  0.0052  0.0456  0.0433  0.2249  0.09
Anderszewski 2003   57  0.3920  0.0145  0.0745  0.1348  0.0846  0.10
Ashkenazy 1981   59  0.3839  0.0081  0.0378  0.0354  0.0486  0.03
Bacha 2000   58  0.3848  0.0062  0.0374  0.0345  0.1458  0.06
Badura 1965   76  0.3278  0.0075  0.0373  0.0379  0.0384  0.03
Barbosa 1983   22  0.4921  0.0118  0.0914  0.5335  0.2618  0.37
Biret 1990   9  0.536  0.034  0.265  0.6821  0.453  0.55
Blet 2003   72  0.3437  0.0061  0.0550  0.0538  0.1548  0.09
Block 1995   80  0.2979  0.0079  0.0381  0.0376  0.0485  0.03
Blumental 1952   11  0.5213  0.0110  0.1011  0.5629  0.446  0.50
Boshniakovich 1969   14  0.5125  0.0020  0.0819  0.4937  0.2130  0.32
Brailowsky 1960   56  0.4080  0.0058  0.0554  0.0564  0.0561  0.05
Bunin 1987   46  0.4311  0.0133  0.1132  0.3425  0.3031  0.32
Bunin 1987b   55  0.4051  0.0037  0.0938  0.2530  0.2635  0.25
Chiu 1999   60  0.3845  0.0053  0.0461  0.0451  0.0663  0.05
Cohen 1997   81  0.2877  0.0083  0.0288  0.0270  0.0487  0.03
Cortot 1951   32  0.4572  0.0034  0.1131  0.373  0.724  0.52
Csalog 1996   70  0.3460  0.0055  0.0462  0.0481  0.0382  0.03
Czerny 1949   2  0.612  0.162  0.512  0.7611  0.691  0.72
Czerny 1990   5  0.543  0.063  0.224  0.6829  0.522  0.59
Duchoud 2007   86  0.2567  0.0065  0.0375  0.0359  0.0577  0.04
Ezaki 2006   10  0.5223  0.0021  0.1013  0.5440  0.1733  0.30
Falvay 1989   42  0.4473  0.0050  0.0552  0.0581  0.0469  0.04
Farrell 1958   48  0.4274  0.0019  0.0921  0.4921  0.457  0.47
Ferenczy 1958   73  0.3468  0.0084  0.0376  0.0383  0.0383  0.03
Fliere 1977   6  0.549  0.016  0.186  0.6137  0.2812  0.41
Fou 1978   51  0.4164  0.0072  0.0549  0.0576  0.0471  0.04
Francois 1956   47  0.4229  0.0056  0.0467  0.0425  0.3145  0.11
Friedman 1923   87  0.2252  0.0086  0.0383  0.0369  0.0491  0.03
Friedman 1923b   88  0.1982  0.0088  0.0386  0.0380  0.0388  0.03
Friedman 1930   79  0.3083  0.0077  0.0387  0.0348  0.0764  0.05
Garcia 2007   77  0.3042  0.0073  0.0464  0.0470  0.0478  0.04
Garcia 2007b   66  0.3555  0.0046  0.0646  0.0661  0.0568  0.05
Gierzod 1998   3  0.5741  0.009  0.1015  0.5344  0.1929  0.32
Gornostaeva 1994   54  0.4049  0.0066  0.0469  0.0477  0.0389  0.03
Groot 1988   36  0.4515  0.0111  0.0918  0.5027  0.2720  0.37
Harasiewicz 1955   7  0.5426  0.0017  0.0927  0.4240  0.2724  0.34
Hatto 1993   19  0.5069  0.0023  0.1520  0.4933  0.3016  0.38
Hatto 1997   18  0.5066  0.0024  0.1124  0.4637  0.2722  0.35
Horowitz 1949   82  0.2750  0.0078  0.0379  0.0365  0.0481  0.03
Indjic 1988   15  0.5170  0.0022  0.0817  0.5032  0.2915  0.38
Kapell 1951   45  0.4356  0.0039  0.0936  0.2644  0.1537  0.20
Kissin 1993   41  0.4418  0.0144  0.0744  0.1549  0.0944  0.12
Kushner 1989   17  0.5012  0.0112  0.087  0.5947  0.0836  0.22
Luisada 1991   31  0.4575  0.0057  0.0460  0.0444  0.1456  0.07
Lushtak 2004   53  0.4054  0.0049  0.0553  0.0562  0.0479  0.04
Malcuzynski 1961   12  0.5240  0.0014  0.099  0.5836  0.3011  0.42
Magaloff 1978   13  0.5127  0.0013  0.0722  0.4927  0.3610  0.42
Magin 1975   24  0.4961  0.0030  0.0826  0.4331  0.3117  0.37
Michalowski 1933   74  0.3336  0.0054  0.0468  0.041  0.6341  0.16
Milkina 1970   4  0.568  0.025  0.153  0.6835  0.299  0.44
Mohovich 1999   27  0.4624  0.0043  0.0843  0.1764  0.0454  0.08
Moravec 1969   49  0.4138  0.0038  0.0640  0.2241  0.1639  0.19
Morozova 2008   38  0.4417  0.0140  0.0637  0.2537  0.1638  0.20
Neighaus 1950   75  0.3219  0.0182  0.0377  0.0361  0.0490  0.03
Niedzielski 1931   85  0.2562  0.0085  0.0382  0.0359  0.0570  0.04
Ohlsson 1999   64  0.3687  0.0067  0.0466  0.0465  0.0476  0.04
Osinska 1989   8  0.5335  0.0016  0.128  0.5941  0.2121  0.35
Pachmann 1927   78  0.3046  0.0080  0.0384  0.0358  0.0575  0.04
Paderewski 1930   84  0.2588  0.0076  0.0380  0.0332  0.1951  0.08
Perlemuter 1992   63  0.3671  0.0071  0.0458  0.0440  0.1650  0.08
Pierdomenico 2008   52  0.4163  0.0059  0.0648  0.0627  0.3742  0.15
Poblocka 1999   26  0.4758  0.0025  0.1030  0.3934  0.2826  0.33
Rabcewiczowa 1932   30  0.4628  0.007  0.1210  0.5622  0.368  0.45
Rachmaninoff 1923   25  0.484  0.058  0.1216  0.5013  0.525  0.51
Rangell 2001   68  0.3530  0.0063  0.0470  0.0454  0.0667  0.05
Richter 1976   40  0.447  0.0226  0.0933  0.3128  0.3823  0.34
Rosen 1989   28  0.4614  0.0136  0.0839  0.2371  0.0447  0.10
Rosenthal 1930   34  0.4516  0.0135  0.0934  0.2917  0.5214  0.39
Rosenthal 1931   69  0.3590  0.0069  0.0465  0.0438  0.1652  0.08
Rosenthal 1931b   71  0.3481  0.0064  0.0371  0.0336  0.2155  0.08
Rosenthal 1931c   37  0.445  0.0328  0.0835  0.2722  0.3832  0.32
Rosenthal 1931d   61  0.3853  0.0047  0.0647  0.0629  0.3443  0.14
Rossi 2007   62  0.3689  0.0070  0.0457  0.0450  0.0662  0.05
Rubinstein 1939   33  0.4532  0.0027  0.0829  0.3936  0.2628  0.32
Rubinstein 1952   16  0.5022  0.0115  0.1112  0.5638  0.2125  0.34
Rubinstein 1966   21  0.4944  0.0031  0.1123  0.4855  0.0640  0.17
Schilhawsky 1960   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Shebanova 2002   39  0.4410  0.0142  0.0842  0.1874  0.0453  0.08
Smith 1975   20  0.4931  0.0029  0.0828  0.4026  0.3913  0.39
Sokolov 2002   65  0.3584  0.0074  0.0372  0.0362  0.0480  0.03
Sztompka 1959   35  0.4533  0.0041  0.0741  0.2131  0.3834  0.28
Tomsic 1995   83  0.2676  0.0087  0.0385  0.0372  0.0574  0.04
Uninsky 1932   67  0.3585  0.0068  0.0459  0.0442  0.1357  0.07
Uninsky 1971   23  0.4947  0.0032  0.1425  0.4441  0.2527  0.33
Wasowski 1980   43  0.4459  0.0048  0.0551  0.0568  0.0560  0.05
Zak 1937   50  0.4191  0.0060  0.0555  0.0578  0.0372  0.04
Zak 1951   44  0.4343  0.0051  0.0463  0.0468  0.0473  0.04
Average   1  0.671  0.461  0.451  0.8243  0.1719  0.37
Random 1   90  0.0086  0.0091  0.0191  0.0115  0.4059  0.06
Random 2   89  0.0657  0.0089  0.0189  0.0131  0.2265  0.05
Random 3   91  -0.0465  0.0090  0.0190  0.0120  0.3066  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).