Morozova 2008

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   11  0.6449  0.0020  0.1020  0.4231  0.3515  0.38
Anderszewski 2003   33  0.5837  0.0030  0.0631  0.3334  0.3128  0.32
Ashkenazy 1981   6  0.663  0.056  0.197  0.558  0.556  0.55
Bacha 2000   69  0.4577  0.0066  0.0464  0.0446  0.0571  0.04
Badura 1965   5  0.672  0.095  0.236  0.572  0.712  0.64
Barbosa 1983   46  0.5427  0.0044  0.0544  0.1235  0.2543  0.17
Biret 1990   47  0.5359  0.0040  0.0638  0.2344  0.1145  0.16
Blet 2003   56  0.5035  0.0064  0.0466  0.0451  0.0667  0.05
Block 1995   60  0.4978  0.0063  0.0467  0.0453  0.0577  0.04
Blumental 1952   49  0.5341  0.0051  0.0558  0.0567  0.0478  0.04
Boshniakovich 1969   23  0.6162  0.0019  0.1124  0.4034  0.3220  0.36
Brailowsky 1960   77  0.4270  0.0078  0.0377  0.0350  0.0672  0.04
Bunin 1987   73  0.4353  0.0073  0.0562  0.0536  0.2353  0.11
Bunin 1987b   72  0.4364  0.0071  0.0465  0.0436  0.2554  0.10
Chiu 1999   35  0.5813  0.0136  0.0840  0.2218  0.3529  0.28
Cohen 1997   88  0.3471  0.0083  0.0385  0.0361  0.0487  0.03
Cortot 1951   68  0.4532  0.0074  0.0556  0.0560  0.0570  0.05
Csalog 1996   80  0.4190  0.0065  0.0374  0.0349  0.0576  0.04
Czerny 1949   29  0.6031  0.0017  0.1113  0.4635  0.3513  0.40
Czerny 1990   21  0.6174  0.0025  0.0722  0.4141  0.1731  0.26
Duchoud 2007   64  0.4824  0.0049  0.0651  0.0612  0.4144  0.16
Ezaki 2006   19  0.6243  0.0033  0.0636  0.2539  0.1937  0.22
Falvay 1989   66  0.4661  0.0075  0.0383  0.0360  0.0673  0.04
Farrell 1958   37  0.589  0.0142  0.0842  0.2137  0.2932  0.25
Ferenczy 1958   78  0.4125  0.0082  0.0287  0.0282  0.0389  0.02
Fliere 1977   9  0.6552  0.0013  0.0815  0.4544  0.1234  0.23
Fou 1978   18  0.6350  0.0016  0.1012  0.4821  0.4211  0.45
Francois 1956   71  0.4445  0.0059  0.0472  0.0437  0.2158  0.09
Friedman 1923   44  0.5420  0.0150  0.0557  0.0538  0.2749  0.12
Friedman 1923b   41  0.5626  0.0048  0.0646  0.0635  0.3446  0.14
Friedman 1930   52  0.5272  0.0061  0.0555  0.0543  0.2055  0.10
Garcia 2007   50  0.5347  0.0056  0.0553  0.0533  0.3048  0.12
Garcia 2007b   53  0.5163  0.0053  0.0647  0.0642  0.1060  0.08
Gierzod 1998   17  0.6354  0.0014  0.0910  0.5137  0.2816  0.38
Gornostaeva 1994   61  0.4814  0.0170  0.0563  0.0585  0.0379  0.04
Groot 1988   63  0.4816  0.0154  0.0649  0.0664  0.0468  0.05
Harasiewicz 1955   14  0.6379  0.0028  0.0630  0.3342  0.1635  0.23
Hatto 1993   16  0.6367  0.0012  0.0723  0.4129  0.2725  0.33
Hatto 1997   12  0.6386  0.0010  0.0918  0.4326  0.3019  0.36
Horowitz 1949   59  0.4948  0.0072  0.0468  0.0443  0.1859  0.08
Indjic 1988   13  0.6387  0.0011  0.0819  0.4227  0.3021  0.35
Kapell 1951   39  0.5730  0.0018  0.1116  0.4432  0.2426  0.32
Kissin 1993   2  0.6919  0.014  0.194  0.6214  0.614  0.61
Kushner 1989   3  0.677  0.012  0.223  0.6710  0.621  0.64
Luisada 1991   8  0.658  0.0121  0.1025  0.3922  0.3417  0.36
Lushtak 2004   32  0.5933  0.0029  0.0627  0.3528  0.3224  0.33
Malcuzynski 1961   67  0.4636  0.0058  0.0560  0.0551  0.0566  0.05
Magaloff 1978   62  0.4851  0.0057  0.0559  0.0549  0.0665  0.05
Magin 1975   4  0.6711  0.017  0.195  0.606  0.565  0.58
Michalowski 1933   65  0.4688  0.0068  0.0376  0.0342  0.1862  0.07
Milkina 1970   10  0.644  0.023  0.172  0.6816  0.543  0.61
Mohovich 1999   51  0.5238  0.0052  0.0552  0.0545  0.1163  0.07
Moravec 1969   83  0.3875  0.0084  0.0288  0.0282  0.0388  0.02
Morozova 2008   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Neighaus 1950   45  0.5439  0.0055  0.0650  0.0658  0.0569  0.05
Niedzielski 1931   76  0.4280  0.0079  0.0375  0.0369  0.0384  0.03
Ohlsson 1999   26  0.6142  0.009  0.119  0.5114  0.527  0.51
Osinska 1989   34  0.5818  0.0122  0.0914  0.4547  0.0840  0.19
Pachmann 1927   70  0.4568  0.0077  0.0379  0.0320  0.4152  0.11
Paderewski 1930   81  0.4169  0.0076  0.0384  0.0366  0.0485  0.03
Perlemuter 1992   48  0.5365  0.0060  0.0473  0.0448  0.0664  0.05
Pierdomenico 2008   74  0.4373  0.0069  0.0469  0.0436  0.2851  0.11
Poblocka 1999   27  0.605  0.0224  0.0826  0.3736  0.3222  0.34
Rabcewiczowa 1932   42  0.5634  0.0027  0.0634  0.2830  0.2630  0.27
Rachmaninoff 1923   43  0.5576  0.0041  0.0741  0.2243  0.1342  0.17
Rangell 2001   75  0.436  0.0167  0.0471  0.0436  0.2756  0.10
Richter 1976   30  0.6028  0.0032  0.0539  0.2227  0.4627  0.32
Rosen 1989   36  0.5829  0.0039  0.0735  0.2740  0.1739  0.21
Rosenthal 1930   84  0.3855  0.0085  0.0378  0.0375  0.0386  0.03
Rosenthal 1931   82  0.3885  0.0080  0.0382  0.0354  0.0675  0.04
Rosenthal 1931b   86  0.3540  0.0087  0.0380  0.0351  0.0581  0.04
Rosenthal 1931c   85  0.3666  0.0086  0.0381  0.0352  0.0582  0.04
Rosenthal 1931d   87  0.3481  0.0088  0.0470  0.0457  0.0580  0.04
Rossi 2007   79  0.4156  0.0081  0.0286  0.0265  0.0483  0.03
Rubinstein 1939   31  0.6023  0.0037  0.0833  0.2914  0.4123  0.34
Rubinstein 1952   55  0.5117  0.0143  0.0843  0.1732  0.3236  0.23
Rubinstein 1966   24  0.6144  0.0026  0.0621  0.4229  0.3714  0.39
Schilhawsky 1960   22  0.6158  0.0034  0.0729  0.3431  0.3918  0.36
Shebanova 2002   15  0.6312  0.018  0.1211  0.5022  0.3712  0.43
Smith 1975   58  0.4991  0.0062  0.0561  0.0578  0.0374  0.04
Sokolov 2002   54  0.5157  0.0046  0.0554  0.0531  0.2450  0.11
Sztompka 1959   7  0.6521  0.0115  0.108  0.5133  0.419  0.46
Tomsic 1995   57  0.4910  0.0145  0.0545  0.1011  0.5633  0.24
Uninsky 1932   20  0.6215  0.0123  0.0817  0.4416  0.4910  0.46
Uninsky 1971   40  0.5782  0.0038  0.0737  0.2439  0.2038  0.22
Wasowski 1980   38  0.5760  0.0047  0.0648  0.0646  0.0861  0.07
Zak 1937   28  0.6046  0.0035  0.0932  0.3057  0.0647  0.13
Zak 1951   25  0.6122  0.0031  0.0628  0.3445  0.1041  0.18
Average   1  0.761  0.621  0.611  0.8233  0.318  0.50
Random 1   91  -0.1183  0.0091  0.0191  0.0165  0.0390  0.02
Random 2   89  0.0284  0.0089  0.0289  0.0210  0.4557  0.09
Random 3   90  -0.1089  0.0090  0.0190  0.0165  0.0491  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).