Lushtak 2004

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   29  0.6347  0.0038  0.0626  0.2222  0.2833  0.25
Anderszewski 2003   62  0.5058  0.0020  0.0733  0.1819  0.3431  0.25
Ashkenazy 1981   7  0.7418  0.0110  0.0811  0.487  0.5011  0.49
Bacha 2000   69  0.4663  0.0074  0.0375  0.0332  0.2162  0.08
Badura 1965   45  0.5683  0.0044  0.0642  0.1116  0.4135  0.21
Barbosa 1983   22  0.6531  0.0023  0.0720  0.355  0.5116  0.42
Biret 1990   27  0.6311  0.039  0.0716  0.406  0.4615  0.43
Blet 2003   6  0.7433  0.0011  0.089  0.512  0.547  0.52
Block 1995   78  0.3760  0.0078  0.0281  0.0265  0.0485  0.03
Blumental 1952   71  0.4440  0.0059  0.0456  0.0432  0.1468  0.07
Boshniakovich 1969   36  0.6014  0.0254  0.0467  0.0424  0.2654  0.10
Brailowsky 1960   49  0.5465  0.0068  0.0377  0.0363  0.0482  0.03
Bunin 1987   1  0.783  0.092  0.152  0.602  0.582  0.59
Bunin 1987b   2  0.7825  0.013  0.153  0.602  0.581  0.59
Chiu 1999   38  0.5934  0.0055  0.0465  0.0425  0.3148  0.11
Cohen 1997   76  0.4144  0.0077  0.0283  0.0216  0.3760  0.09
Cortot 1951   39  0.5890  0.0046  0.0746  0.0721  0.3443  0.15
Csalog 1996   72  0.4327  0.0166  0.0369  0.0323  0.3652  0.10
Czerny 1949   48  0.5564  0.0049  0.0550  0.0529  0.2650  0.11
Czerny 1990   37  0.5975  0.0041  0.0535  0.1636  0.1941  0.17
Duchoud 2007   21  0.654  0.077  0.0914  0.448  0.4714  0.45
Ezaki 2006   3  0.781  0.131  0.131  0.603  0.563  0.58
Falvay 1989   16  0.6853  0.0029  0.0824  0.2525  0.2629  0.25
Farrell 1958   42  0.5735  0.0061  0.0370  0.0316  0.2757  0.09
Ferenczy 1958   25  0.6467  0.0047  0.0649  0.0610  0.4542  0.16
Fliere 1977   13  0.6930  0.0022  0.0717  0.3721  0.2823  0.32
Fou 1978   15  0.689  0.0426  0.0625  0.2530  0.3225  0.28
Francois 1956   51  0.5452  0.0037  0.0534  0.1729  0.1940  0.18
Friedman 1923   87  0.2050  0.0085  0.0282  0.0243  0.1275  0.05
Friedman 1923b   86  0.2132  0.0084  0.0285  0.0243  0.1374  0.05
Friedman 1930   74  0.4238  0.0053  0.0462  0.0422  0.3547  0.12
Garcia 2007   73  0.4284  0.0075  0.0284  0.0229  0.2567  0.07
Garcia 2007b   82  0.2878  0.0086  0.0379  0.0353  0.0488  0.03
Gierzod 1998   32  0.6224  0.0136  0.0436  0.1616  0.2636  0.20
Gornostaeva 1994   59  0.5141  0.0071  0.0461  0.0458  0.0479  0.04
Groot 1988   34  0.6149  0.0032  0.0641  0.1245  0.0666  0.08
Harasiewicz 1955   26  0.6437  0.0019  0.0812  0.462  0.4613  0.46
Hatto 1993   64  0.4976  0.0034  0.0538  0.1415  0.3634  0.22
Hatto 1997   40  0.5812  0.0317  0.0922  0.357  0.5117  0.42
Horowitz 1949   65  0.4956  0.0072  0.0459  0.0446  0.0673  0.05
Indjic 1988   54  0.5379  0.0025  0.0629  0.2013  0.4026  0.28
Kapell 1951   19  0.6626  0.0121  0.0719  0.3511  0.4719  0.41
Kissin 1993   31  0.6222  0.0156  0.0464  0.0441  0.1764  0.08
Kushner 1989   56  0.5236  0.0051  0.0552  0.0553  0.0477  0.04
Luisada 1991   46  0.5686  0.0042  0.0544  0.0943  0.1251  0.10
Lushtak 2004   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Malcuzynski 1961   28  0.6319  0.0148  0.0648  0.0643  0.1063  0.08
Magaloff 1978   41  0.585  0.0716  0.0827  0.2136  0.1737  0.19
Magin 1975   70  0.4568  0.0076  0.0373  0.0349  0.0576  0.04
Michalowski 1933   77  0.4061  0.0060  0.0453  0.0427  0.3249  0.11
Milkina 1970   60  0.5043  0.0073  0.0457  0.0454  0.0578  0.04
Mohovich 1999   12  0.6910  0.0418  0.0913  0.446  0.5212  0.48
Moravec 1969   75  0.4269  0.0079  0.0376  0.0365  0.0481  0.03
Morozova 2008   23  0.6546  0.0035  0.0439  0.1412  0.2638  0.19
Neighaus 1950   5  0.747  0.0514  0.097  0.518  0.528  0.51
Niedzielski 1931   84  0.2787  0.0081  0.0287  0.0250  0.0483  0.03
Ohlsson 1999   10  0.7023  0.018  0.076  0.524  0.556  0.53
Osinska 1989   50  0.5429  0.0052  0.0463  0.0429  0.2255  0.09
Pachmann 1927   44  0.5713  0.0227  0.0631  0.1916  0.4724  0.30
Paderewski 1930   43  0.5720  0.0157  0.0460  0.049  0.3946  0.12
Perlemuter 1992   17  0.6780  0.0031  0.0623  0.3014  0.4022  0.35
Pierdomenico 2008   57  0.5185  0.0063  0.0458  0.0442  0.1070  0.06
Poblocka 1999   9  0.718  0.055  0.095  0.542  0.584  0.56
Rabcewiczowa 1932   66  0.4973  0.0062  0.0455  0.0429  0.2256  0.09
Rachmaninoff 1923   53  0.5381  0.0050  0.0745  0.0722  0.2844  0.14
Rangell 2001   67  0.4828  0.0167  0.0374  0.0319  0.2661  0.09
Richter 1976   33  0.6274  0.0043  0.0540  0.135  0.4830  0.25
Rosen 1989   52  0.5357  0.0070  0.0372  0.0358  0.0486  0.03
Rosenthal 1930   68  0.4688  0.0064  0.0454  0.0432  0.2453  0.10
Rosenthal 1931   79  0.3677  0.0082  0.0380  0.0355  0.0484  0.03
Rosenthal 1931b   81  0.3462  0.0083  0.0368  0.0350  0.0580  0.04
Rosenthal 1931c   61  0.5045  0.0065  0.0371  0.0338  0.1471  0.06
Rosenthal 1931d   80  0.3570  0.0033  0.0543  0.0944  0.0865  0.08
Rossi 2007   83  0.2748  0.0080  0.0378  0.0338  0.1169  0.06
Rubinstein 1939   85  0.2471  0.0087  0.0288  0.0243  0.1272  0.05
Rubinstein 1952   63  0.506  0.0628  0.0737  0.1530  0.2239  0.18
Rubinstein 1966   55  0.5254  0.0069  0.0466  0.0432  0.2158  0.09
Schilhawsky 1960   11  0.702  0.114  0.1410  0.494  0.519  0.50
Shebanova 2002   35  0.6017  0.0258  0.0551  0.0537  0.1559  0.09
Smith 1975   8  0.7215  0.026  0.104  0.562  0.4310  0.49
Sokolov 2002   14  0.6966  0.0012  0.1115  0.4117  0.4118  0.41
Sztompka 1959   20  0.6659  0.0045  0.0647  0.0628  0.3345  0.14
Tomsic 1995   4  0.7516  0.0215  0.108  0.513  0.585  0.54
Uninsky 1932   47  0.5655  0.0039  0.0532  0.1924  0.3432  0.25
Uninsky 1971   30  0.6321  0.0113  0.1118  0.3618  0.4221  0.39
Wasowski 1980   58  0.5139  0.0040  0.0630  0.1914  0.3228  0.25
Zak 1937   24  0.6542  0.0030  0.0628  0.2115  0.3527  0.27
Zak 1951   18  0.6751  0.0024  0.0821  0.359  0.4820  0.41
Random 1   89  -0.1082  0.0090  0.0190  0.0166  0.0390  0.02
Random 2   90  -0.2189  0.0089  0.0189  0.0166  0.0389  0.02
Random 3   88  0.0972  0.0088  0.0286  0.0257  0.0487  0.03

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).