Malcuzynski 1961

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   25  0.5477  0.0029  0.0531  0.1855  0.0550  0.09
Anderszewski 2003   8  0.608  0.028  0.1910  0.5022  0.467  0.48
Ashkenazy 1981   77  0.4027  0.0067  0.0556  0.0562  0.0475  0.04
Bacha 2000   76  0.4156  0.0080  0.0377  0.0362  0.0477  0.03
Badura 1965   59  0.4648  0.0042  0.0539  0.1356  0.0554  0.08
Barbosa 1983   87  0.3244  0.0070  0.0472  0.0465  0.0574  0.04
Biret 1990   39  0.5026  0.0022  0.0925  0.2843  0.1129  0.18
Blet 2003   83  0.3888  0.0087  0.0469  0.0467  0.0385  0.03
Block 1995   50  0.4773  0.0056  0.0647  0.0661  0.0565  0.05
Blumental 1952   63  0.4418  0.0121  0.1024  0.3032  0.2221  0.26
Boshniakovich 1969   3  0.674  0.054  0.187  0.6014  0.574  0.58
Brailowsky 1960   73  0.4145  0.0083  0.0380  0.0353  0.0669  0.04
Bunin 1987   54  0.4636  0.0048  0.0471  0.0417  0.4539  0.13
Bunin 1987b   56  0.4643  0.0049  0.0550  0.0518  0.4532  0.15
Chiu 1999   86  0.3367  0.0084  0.0379  0.0373  0.0479  0.03
Cohen 1997   88  0.1482  0.0088  0.0381  0.0382  0.0388  0.03
Cortot 1951   18  0.5641  0.0032  0.0628  0.2410  0.5914  0.38
Csalog 1996   84  0.3546  0.0086  0.0375  0.0374  0.0384  0.03
Czerny 1949   1  0.691  0.421  0.412  0.783  0.701  0.74
Czerny 1990   7  0.6024  0.0014  0.098  0.5638  0.2119  0.34
Duchoud 2007   82  0.3919  0.0064  0.0466  0.0444  0.1359  0.07
Ezaki 2006   10  0.5923  0.007  0.164  0.6515  0.563  0.60
Falvay 1989   70  0.4138  0.0075  0.0288  0.0271  0.0480  0.03
Farrell 1958   32  0.5228  0.0033  0.0629  0.2455  0.0641  0.12
Ferenczy 1958   81  0.4083  0.0085  0.0382  0.0363  0.0386  0.03
Fliere 1977   15  0.5757  0.0023  0.1018  0.4159  0.0536  0.14
Fou 1978   44  0.4975  0.0052  0.0462  0.0477  0.0471  0.04
Francois 1956   64  0.4442  0.0079  0.0385  0.0362  0.0490  0.03
Friedman 1923   57  0.4658  0.0060  0.0458  0.0441  0.1857  0.08
Friedman 1923b   58  0.4668  0.0059  0.0457  0.0442  0.1756  0.08
Friedman 1930   48  0.4853  0.0062  0.0549  0.0545  0.1453  0.08
Garcia 2007   36  0.5169  0.0039  0.0538  0.1320  0.4525  0.24
Garcia 2007b   43  0.4937  0.0040  0.0543  0.0939  0.1343  0.11
Gierzod 1998   11  0.5960  0.0016  0.1114  0.4655  0.0631  0.17
Gornostaeva 1994   5  0.6420  0.005  0.1613  0.4717  0.499  0.48
Groot 1988   66  0.4349  0.0061  0.0555  0.0567  0.0476  0.04
Harasiewicz 1955   6  0.645  0.053  0.233  0.6816  0.592  0.63
Hatto 1993   75  0.4184  0.0046  0.0646  0.0658  0.0568  0.05
Hatto 1997   72  0.4159  0.0045  0.0444  0.0744  0.1249  0.09
Horowitz 1949   37  0.5050  0.0055  0.0552  0.0530  0.4434  0.15
Indjic 1988   69  0.4233  0.0035  0.0540  0.1244  0.1242  0.12
Kapell 1951   9  0.5913  0.0112  0.135  0.6224  0.3310  0.45
Kissin 1993   13  0.5814  0.0115  0.0911  0.4843  0.2417  0.34
Kushner 1989   31  0.5261  0.0051  0.0463  0.0464  0.0472  0.04
Luisada 1991   78  0.4089  0.0081  0.0383  0.0375  0.0378  0.03
Lushtak 2004   74  0.4178  0.0073  0.0373  0.0376  0.0387  0.03
Malcuzynski 1961   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Magaloff 1978   41  0.5054  0.0054  0.0548  0.0542  0.1352  0.08
Magin 1975   20  0.5679  0.0034  0.0530  0.2163  0.0447  0.09
Michalowski 1933   33  0.5272  0.0038  0.0637  0.1529  0.2826  0.20
Milkina 1970   4  0.6535  0.006  0.256  0.6125  0.475  0.54
Mohovich 1999   46  0.4862  0.0050  0.0554  0.0556  0.0567  0.05
Moravec 1969   30  0.539  0.0220  0.1019  0.4011  0.606  0.49
Morozova 2008   60  0.4631  0.0058  0.0551  0.0560  0.0564  0.05
Neighaus 1950   38  0.5051  0.0057  0.0553  0.0544  0.0960  0.07
Niedzielski 1931   21  0.5621  0.0027  0.0927  0.2526  0.3320  0.29
Ohlsson 1999   51  0.4763  0.0065  0.0468  0.0452  0.0573  0.04
Osinska 1989   14  0.5825  0.0017  0.1315  0.4658  0.0630  0.17
Pachmann 1927   67  0.4291  0.0072  0.0376  0.0334  0.2548  0.09
Paderewski 1930   55  0.4686  0.0041  0.0442  0.1129  0.3128  0.18
Perlemuter 1992   80  0.4065  0.0069  0.0467  0.0441  0.1551  0.08
Pierdomenico 2008   68  0.4234  0.0076  0.0287  0.0253  0.0682  0.03
Poblocka 1999   24  0.5452  0.0037  0.0532  0.1748  0.0644  0.10
Rabcewiczowa 1932   62  0.4429  0.0071  0.0374  0.0372  0.0483  0.03
Rachmaninoff 1923   19  0.5611  0.0111  0.139  0.5424  0.3112  0.41
Rangell 2001   28  0.5332  0.0018  0.1223  0.3313  0.4813  0.40
Richter 1976   23  0.5516  0.0124  0.0926  0.2821  0.5016  0.37
Rosen 1989   35  0.5170  0.0053  0.0459  0.0449  0.0666  0.05
Rosenthal 1930   29  0.5310  0.0228  0.0634  0.1625  0.4023  0.25
Rosenthal 1931   52  0.4687  0.0077  0.0286  0.0234  0.2458  0.07
Rosenthal 1931b   61  0.4576  0.0078  0.0470  0.0433  0.2746  0.10
Rosenthal 1931c   42  0.4947  0.0043  0.0641  0.1127  0.3827  0.20
Rosenthal 1931d   49  0.4739  0.0063  0.0460  0.0427  0.4040  0.13
Rossi 2007   34  0.5122  0.0026  0.0821  0.356  0.5611  0.44
Rubinstein 1939   71  0.4130  0.0066  0.0461  0.0455  0.0570  0.04
Rubinstein 1952   85  0.3315  0.0182  0.0378  0.0377  0.0389  0.03
Rubinstein 1966   79  0.4074  0.0044  0.0445  0.0762  0.0562  0.06
Schilhawsky 1960   17  0.5617  0.0113  0.1216  0.4435  0.2618  0.34
Shebanova 2002   27  0.5464  0.0047  0.0465  0.0446  0.0863  0.06
Smith 1975   53  0.4690  0.0068  0.0464  0.0479  0.0381  0.03
Sokolov 2002   40  0.5012  0.0136  0.0535  0.1540  0.1238  0.13
Sztompka 1959   12  0.587  0.0319  0.1620  0.3855  0.0635  0.15
Tomsic 1995   65  0.4355  0.0074  0.0384  0.0345  0.1161  0.06
Uninsky 1932   16  0.576  0.059  0.1412  0.4817  0.488  0.48
Uninsky 1971   26  0.5440  0.0025  0.1122  0.3340  0.1922  0.25
Wasowski 1980   22  0.553  0.0610  0.1017  0.4330  0.3115  0.37
Zak 1937   47  0.4880  0.0031  0.0736  0.1540  0.1437  0.14
Zak 1951   45  0.4866  0.0030  0.0533  0.1742  0.1333  0.15
Average   2  0.682  0.132  0.211  0.7951  0.0724  0.24
Random 1   90  -0.0571  0.0089  0.0289  0.028  0.4745  0.10
Random 2   91  -0.1081  0.0091  0.0191  0.0175  0.0391  0.02
Random 3   89  -0.0285  0.0090  0.0290  0.0219  0.2955  0.08

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).