Tomsic 1995

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   73  0.2961  0.0074  0.0569  0.0565  0.0475  0.04
Anderszewski 2003   18  0.4833  0.0020  0.1220  0.4545  0.1226  0.23
Ashkenazy 1981   62  0.3759  0.0066  0.0750  0.0744  0.1250  0.09
Bacha 2000   63  0.3737  0.0056  0.0752  0.0748  0.0555  0.06
Badura 1965   52  0.396  0.0524  0.0932  0.2521  0.3820  0.31
Barbosa 1983   28  0.4555  0.0030  0.0828  0.2955  0.0736  0.14
Biret 1990   43  0.4184  0.0051  0.0566  0.0564  0.0572  0.05
Blet 2003   59  0.3831  0.0061  0.0656  0.0652  0.0658  0.06
Block 1995   39  0.4210  0.0221  0.1122  0.3829  0.3318  0.35
Blumental 1952   57  0.3865  0.0063  0.0754  0.0763  0.0560  0.06
Boshniakovich 1969   26  0.4518  0.0122  0.1321  0.4139  0.1525  0.25
Brailowsky 1960   70  0.3249  0.0070  0.0659  0.0677  0.0461  0.05
Bunin 1987   51  0.3966  0.0049  0.0564  0.0551  0.0570  0.05
Bunin 1987b   46  0.4043  0.0042  0.0742  0.1531  0.2430  0.19
Chiu 1999   49  0.3919  0.0144  0.0644  0.1433  0.2232  0.18
Cohen 1997   66  0.3511  0.0258  0.0848  0.0837  0.1348  0.10
Cortot 1951   86  0.1530  0.0073  0.0475  0.0481  0.0278  0.03
Csalog 1996   9  0.5426  0.009  0.184  0.639  0.563  0.59
Czerny 1949   48  0.4052  0.0057  0.0753  0.0755  0.0752  0.07
Czerny 1990   45  0.4123  0.0164  0.0749  0.0772  0.0471  0.05
Duchoud 2007   53  0.3941  0.0034  0.0537  0.216  0.5817  0.35
Ezaki 2006   4  0.5617  0.017  0.126  0.6326  0.417  0.51
Falvay 1989   7  0.543  0.073  0.1311  0.5533  0.4113  0.47
Farrell 1958   58  0.3862  0.0053  0.0661  0.0657  0.0565  0.05
Ferenczy 1958   56  0.3967  0.0062  0.0565  0.0553  0.0669  0.05
Fliere 1977   20  0.4785  0.0028  0.0727  0.2949  0.0638  0.13
Fou 1978   22  0.4716  0.0123  0.0923  0.3549  0.0635  0.14
Francois 1956   78  0.2372  0.0076  0.0476  0.0479  0.0381  0.03
Friedman 1923   85  0.1675  0.0087  0.0380  0.0389  0.0290  0.02
Friedman 1923b   84  0.1686  0.0086  0.0289  0.0282  0.0388  0.02
Friedman 1930   83  0.1780  0.0083  0.0287  0.0287  0.0285  0.02
Garcia 2007   30  0.4412  0.0213  0.1514  0.529  0.586  0.55
Garcia 2007b   33  0.4420  0.0132  0.0531  0.2630  0.3322  0.29
Gierzod 1998   11  0.539  0.0214  0.1017  0.4747  0.0831  0.19
Gornostaeva 1994   25  0.4563  0.0038  0.0541  0.1742  0.0943  0.12
Groot 1988   60  0.3851  0.0059  0.0847  0.0846  0.0851  0.08
Harasiewicz 1955   13  0.5228  0.0019  0.1419  0.4742  0.2121  0.31
Hatto 1993   47  0.4087  0.0046  0.0567  0.0551  0.0573  0.05
Hatto 1997   38  0.4250  0.0035  0.0729  0.2875  0.0446  0.11
Horowitz 1949   71  0.3125  0.0072  0.0568  0.0555  0.0566  0.05
Indjic 1988   42  0.4134  0.0041  0.0738  0.1967  0.0449  0.09
Kapell 1951   2  0.584  0.054  0.135  0.6327  0.485  0.55
Kissin 1993   17  0.4938  0.0018  0.1316  0.4925  0.5010  0.49
Kushner 1989   6  0.5522  0.0110  0.188  0.6038  0.3114  0.43
Luisada 1991   67  0.3440  0.0069  0.0846  0.0849  0.0556  0.06
Lushtak 2004   36  0.4488  0.0029  0.0825  0.3449  0.0637  0.14
Malcuzynski 1961   15  0.5139  0.0011  0.159  0.5825  0.439  0.50
Magaloff 1978   40  0.4236  0.0060  0.0660  0.0659  0.0562  0.05
Magin 1975   29  0.4564  0.0026  0.0726  0.3139  0.1627  0.22
Michalowski 1933   87  0.1170  0.0078  0.0377  0.0389  0.0284  0.02
Milkina 1970   14  0.5124  0.0012  0.1312  0.5554  0.0633  0.18
Mohovich 1999   3  0.581  0.401  0.391  0.746  0.671  0.70
Moravec 1969   12  0.5227  0.0016  0.1118  0.4718  0.4812  0.47
Morozova 2008   19  0.485  0.056  0.1310  0.5714  0.554  0.56
Neighaus 1950   79  0.2176  0.0082  0.0383  0.0387  0.0289  0.02
Niedzielski 1931   68  0.3448  0.0065  0.0562  0.0530  0.2545  0.11
Ohlsson 1999   21  0.4745  0.0017  0.1015  0.4911  0.538  0.51
Osinska 1989   8  0.5413  0.028  0.137  0.6237  0.3711  0.48
Pachmann 1927   61  0.3835  0.0033  0.0545  0.129  0.5624  0.26
Paderewski 1930   88  0.1189  0.0088  0.0286  0.0283  0.0283  0.02
Perlemuter 1992   64  0.3656  0.0068  0.0751  0.0739  0.1940  0.12
Pierdomenico 2008   50  0.3957  0.0055  0.0655  0.0628  0.3634  0.15
Poblocka 1999   41  0.4146  0.0047  0.0658  0.0659  0.0757  0.06
Rabcewiczowa 1932   54  0.3981  0.0050  0.0573  0.0558  0.0564  0.05
Rachmaninoff 1923   82  0.2071  0.0080  0.0379  0.0383  0.0376  0.03
Rangell 2001   44  0.4168  0.0052  0.0571  0.0545  0.1054  0.07
Richter 1976   24  0.4621  0.0131  0.0834  0.2535  0.2823  0.26
Rosen 1989   5  0.5514  0.025  0.123  0.648  0.622  0.63
Rosenthal 1930   81  0.2173  0.0085  0.0285  0.0283  0.0386  0.02
Rosenthal 1931   72  0.3044  0.0071  0.0657  0.0673  0.0468  0.05
Rosenthal 1931b   76  0.2547  0.0079  0.0381  0.0379  0.0379  0.03
Rosenthal 1931c   74  0.2890  0.0075  0.0378  0.0365  0.0480  0.03
Rosenthal 1931d   80  0.2177  0.0081  0.0382  0.0374  0.0377  0.03
Rossi 2007   35  0.447  0.0325  0.0933  0.2519  0.4219  0.32
Rubinstein 1939   55  0.3960  0.0054  0.0563  0.0555  0.0563  0.05
Rubinstein 1952   16  0.4929  0.0037  0.0536  0.2147  0.0744  0.12
Rubinstein 1966   10  0.5332  0.0015  0.1113  0.5240  0.2316  0.35
Schilhawsky 1960   75  0.2678  0.0077  0.0572  0.0585  0.0374  0.04
Shebanova 2002   31  0.4469  0.0036  0.0630  0.2640  0.1729  0.21
Smith 1975   77  0.2382  0.0084  0.0284  0.0282  0.0382  0.02
Sokolov 2002   32  0.4415  0.0127  0.0624  0.3418  0.5015  0.41
Sztompka 1959   65  0.3653  0.0067  0.0570  0.0553  0.0567  0.05
Tomsic 1995   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Uninsky 1932   69  0.3374  0.0048  0.0474  0.0445  0.1059  0.06
Uninsky 1971   27  0.4542  0.0039  0.0739  0.1854  0.0647  0.10
Wasowski 1980   23  0.468  0.0240  0.0835  0.2246  0.0739  0.12
Zak 1937   34  0.4491  0.0045  0.0743  0.1444  0.1141  0.12
Zak 1951   37  0.4483  0.0043  0.0540  0.1742  0.0942  0.12
Average   1  0.612  0.082  0.222  0.7156  0.0628  0.21
Random 1   90  -0.0558  0.0090  0.0190  0.0147  0.0587  0.02
Random 2   89  0.0254  0.0089  0.0288  0.0230  0.2353  0.07
Random 3   91  -0.1379  0.0091  0.0191  0.0185  0.0291  0.01

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).