Czerny 1949

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   8  0.6629  0.006  0.256  0.672  0.588  0.62
Anderszewski 2003   54  0.4010  0.0127  0.0834  0.2434  0.2133  0.22
Ashkenazy 1981   52  0.4149  0.0049  0.0553  0.0571  0.0466  0.04
Bacha 2000   78  0.2757  0.0077  0.0284  0.0267  0.0385  0.02
Badura 1965   37  0.4676  0.0044  0.0644  0.1232  0.2236  0.16
Barbosa 1983   55  0.3969  0.0060  0.0648  0.0646  0.0558  0.05
Biret 1990   13  0.5915  0.0018  0.1216  0.5311  0.5114  0.52
Blet 2003   42  0.4577  0.0050  0.0747  0.0757  0.0554  0.06
Block 1995   73  0.3174  0.0081  0.0381  0.0379  0.0382  0.03
Blumental 1952   43  0.4424  0.0020  0.1029  0.3111  0.4322  0.37
Boshniakovich 1969   61  0.3780  0.0078  0.0285  0.0271  0.0388  0.02
Brailowsky 1960   58  0.3860  0.0075  0.0371  0.0368  0.0471  0.03
Bunin 1987   24  0.5346  0.0031  0.0928  0.3333  0.2227  0.27
Bunin 1987b   23  0.5351  0.0032  0.1427  0.3333  0.2128  0.26
Chiu 1999   68  0.3286  0.0072  0.0366  0.0378  0.0372  0.03
Cohen 1997   80  0.2016  0.0080  0.0364  0.0357  0.0483  0.03
Cortot 1951   16  0.5725  0.0014  0.1117  0.522  0.6011  0.56
Csalog 1996   75  0.2972  0.0084  0.0380  0.0373  0.0380  0.03
Czerny 1949   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Czerny 1990   3  0.6938  0.007  0.1710  0.647  0.549  0.59
Duchoud 2007   39  0.4665  0.0051  0.0649  0.0661  0.0460  0.05
Ezaki 2006   5  0.687  0.015  0.184  0.746  0.595  0.66
Falvay 1989   18  0.5517  0.0028  0.0823  0.4037  0.1430  0.24
Farrell 1958   38  0.4642  0.0047  0.0651  0.0633  0.2338  0.12
Ferenczy 1958   17  0.569  0.0115  0.1120  0.489  0.4817  0.48
Fliere 1977   45  0.4481  0.0061  0.0460  0.0478  0.0370  0.03
Fou 1978   65  0.3614  0.0036  0.0643  0.1372  0.0449  0.07
Francois 1956   1  0.751  0.571  0.561  0.831  0.761  0.79
Friedman 1923   84  0.1387  0.0058  0.0556  0.0544  0.1151  0.07
Friedman 1923b   85  0.1382  0.0059  0.0557  0.0557  0.0561  0.05
Friedman 1930   60  0.3736  0.0041  0.0638  0.1524  0.3831  0.24
Garcia 2007   86  0.0778  0.0088  0.0289  0.0275  0.0387  0.02
Garcia 2007b   87  0.0788  0.0089  0.0288  0.0287  0.0289  0.02
Gierzod 1998   25  0.5258  0.0021  0.1019  0.4814  0.3719  0.42
Gornostaeva 1994   4  0.692  0.112  0.168  0.666  0.617  0.63
Groot 1988   29  0.5227  0.0035  0.0735  0.2365  0.0441  0.10
Harasiewicz 1955   32  0.4912  0.0119  0.1215  0.5626  0.2621  0.38
Hatto 1993   82  0.1883  0.0066  0.0462  0.0469  0.0467  0.04
Hatto 1997   69  0.3231  0.0042  0.0641  0.1348  0.0547  0.08
Horowitz 1949   46  0.4366  0.0053  0.0650  0.0655  0.0457  0.05
Indjic 1988   81  0.1984  0.0064  0.0365  0.0370  0.0379  0.03
Kapell 1951   12  0.606  0.0411  0.1513  0.5613  0.4715  0.51
Kissin 1993   59  0.3867  0.0068  0.0375  0.0363  0.0478  0.03
Kushner 1989   26  0.5262  0.0038  0.0536  0.2338  0.1635  0.19
Luisada 1991   62  0.3728  0.0070  0.0373  0.0372  0.0469  0.03
Lushtak 2004   50  0.4175  0.0037  0.0639  0.1559  0.0448  0.08
Malcuzynski 1961   14  0.5943  0.0012  0.149  0.6519  0.3816  0.50
Magaloff 1978   41  0.4526  0.0039  0.0640  0.1369  0.0352  0.06
Magin 1975   74  0.3032  0.0069  0.0282  0.0257  0.0475  0.03
Michalowski 1933   64  0.3634  0.0040  0.0642  0.1341  0.1637  0.14
Milkina 1970   35  0.4711  0.0126  0.0932  0.2742  0.1534  0.20
Mohovich 1999   22  0.5330  0.0030  0.0824  0.3840  0.1432  0.23
Moravec 1969   10  0.623  0.058  0.235  0.732  0.653  0.69
Morozova 2008   28  0.5237  0.0024  0.0822  0.4020  0.2625  0.32
Neighaus 1950   19  0.5552  0.0017  0.1014  0.5632  0.2124  0.34
Niedzielski 1931   66  0.3573  0.0062  0.0368  0.0371  0.0374  0.03
Ohlsson 1999   30  0.5133  0.0043  0.0737  0.1650  0.0544  0.09
Osinska 1989   7  0.6613  0.019  0.157  0.674  0.626  0.64
Pachmann 1927   83  0.1889  0.0085  0.0372  0.0386  0.0286  0.02
Paderewski 1930   48  0.4268  0.0056  0.0461  0.0479  0.0377  0.03
Perlemuter 1992   53  0.4185  0.0055  0.0459  0.0455  0.0463  0.04
Pierdomenico 2008   56  0.3835  0.0065  0.0367  0.0374  0.0373  0.03
Poblocka 1999   36  0.4771  0.0045  0.0552  0.0547  0.0556  0.05
Rabcewiczowa 1932   2  0.704  0.054  0.163  0.741  0.792  0.76
Rachmaninoff 1923   27  0.5244  0.0025  0.1125  0.3722  0.3523  0.36
Rangell 2001   67  0.3320  0.0063  0.0363  0.0381  0.0384  0.03
Richter 1976   76  0.2979  0.0082  0.0286  0.0264  0.0476  0.03
Rosen 1989   34  0.4855  0.0029  0.0830  0.3034  0.2129  0.25
Rosenthal 1930   20  0.5521  0.0023  0.0821  0.467  0.6413  0.54
Rosenthal 1931   71  0.3147  0.0067  0.0377  0.0326  0.2346  0.08
Rosenthal 1931b   77  0.2870  0.0071  0.0376  0.0338  0.1650  0.07
Rosenthal 1931c   31  0.4950  0.0033  0.1031  0.2810  0.5620  0.40
Rosenthal 1931d   72  0.3118  0.0073  0.0369  0.0343  0.0862  0.05
Rossi 2007   57  0.3853  0.0074  0.0370  0.0322  0.2943  0.09
Rubinstein 1939   79  0.2422  0.0083  0.0378  0.0352  0.0564  0.04
Rubinstein 1952   63  0.3761  0.0076  0.0379  0.0362  0.0568  0.04
Rubinstein 1966   49  0.4245  0.0054  0.0554  0.0554  0.0659  0.05
Schilhawsky 1960   40  0.4548  0.0048  0.0746  0.0752  0.0555  0.06
Shebanova 2002   70  0.3263  0.0079  0.0374  0.0371  0.0481  0.03
Smith 1975   6  0.685  0.053  0.142  0.754  0.614  0.68
Sokolov 2002   9  0.6319  0.0010  0.1611  0.648  0.4812  0.55
Sztompka 1959   15  0.5940  0.0016  0.1518  0.4923  0.3918  0.44
Tomsic 1995   33  0.4939  0.0034  0.1033  0.2563  0.0439  0.10
Uninsky 1932   21  0.5454  0.0022  0.0926  0.3723  0.2626  0.31
Uninsky 1971   11  0.628  0.0113  0.1412  0.6110  0.5110  0.56
Wasowski 1980   44  0.4459  0.0057  0.0558  0.0540  0.1542  0.09
Zak 1937   51  0.4190  0.0052  0.0745  0.0747  0.0653  0.06
Zak 1951   47  0.4356  0.0046  0.0555  0.0563  0.0465  0.04
Random 1   90  -0.1064  0.0090  0.0190  0.0189  0.0190  0.01
Random 2   89  0.0423  0.0087  0.0283  0.024  0.4445  0.09
Random 3   88  0.0541  0.0086  0.0287  0.023  0.5140  0.10

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).