Duchoud 2007

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   59  0.2758  0.0063  0.0558  0.0573  0.0476  0.04
Anderszewski 2003   72  0.2060  0.0071  0.0469  0.0443  0.1156  0.07
Ashkenazy 1981   28  0.3981  0.0042  0.0836  0.2463  0.0649  0.12
Bacha 2000   81  0.1343  0.0076  0.0376  0.0373  0.0479  0.03
Badura 1965   70  0.2146  0.0053  0.0559  0.0541  0.1452  0.08
Barbosa 1983   56  0.2773  0.0061  0.0563  0.0562  0.0566  0.05
Biret 1990   12  0.4462  0.0024  0.0723  0.467  0.7110  0.57
Blet 2003   40  0.3663  0.0032  0.0731  0.3536  0.3829  0.36
Block 1995   66  0.2484  0.0062  0.0474  0.0484  0.0384  0.03
Blumental 1952   78  0.1685  0.0080  0.0381  0.0379  0.0385  0.03
Boshniakovich 1969   64  0.2454  0.0048  0.0751  0.0761  0.0661  0.06
Brailowsky 1960   74  0.1969  0.0074  0.0472  0.0474  0.0474  0.04
Bunin 1987   38  0.3726  0.0015  0.1119  0.5211  0.5712  0.54
Bunin 1987b   32  0.377  0.0214  0.1216  0.5211  0.5711  0.54
Chiu 1999   3  0.552  0.213  0.263  0.793  0.762  0.77
Cohen 1997   58  0.2715  0.0065  0.0561  0.0555  0.0669  0.05
Cortot 1951   69  0.2286  0.0073  0.0656  0.0656  0.0570  0.05
Csalog 1996   4  0.503  0.202  0.224  0.751  0.793  0.77
Czerny 1949   73  0.2068  0.0081  0.0380  0.0352  0.0767  0.05
Czerny 1990   6  0.4725  0.0018  0.1311  0.5820  0.707  0.64
Duchoud 2007   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Ezaki 2006   79  0.1619  0.0077  0.0378  0.0372  0.0378  0.03
Falvay 1989   19  0.4110  0.0119  0.1224  0.466  0.5416  0.50
Farrell 1958   5  0.489  0.028  0.1312  0.562  0.746  0.64
Ferenczy 1958   87  0.0076  0.0090  0.0288  0.0266  0.0482  0.03
Fliere 1977   16  0.4261  0.0017  0.158  0.6036  0.4513  0.52
Fou 1978   51  0.3167  0.0055  0.0565  0.0557  0.0564  0.05
Francois 1956   63  0.2513  0.0168  0.0566  0.0545  0.1253  0.08
Friedman 1923   33  0.3782  0.0029  0.0726  0.4134  0.4324  0.42
Friedman 1923b   29  0.3848  0.0027  0.0920  0.4831  0.5018  0.49
Friedman 1930   26  0.3959  0.0026  0.0821  0.4735  0.4222  0.44
Garcia 2007   54  0.2855  0.0056  0.0564  0.0546  0.0668  0.05
Garcia 2007b   55  0.2877  0.0051  0.0557  0.0545  0.1254  0.08
Gierzod 1998   88  -0.0187  0.0085  0.0287  0.0279  0.0288  0.02
Gornostaeva 1994   47  0.3147  0.0050  0.0750  0.0731  0.3943  0.17
Groot 1988   14  0.4328  0.0022  0.0918  0.5235  0.2432  0.35
Harasiewicz 1955   46  0.3178  0.0052  0.0655  0.0650  0.0662  0.06
Hatto 1993   13  0.4414  0.0010  0.1425  0.4529  0.3228  0.38
Hatto 1997   31  0.3822  0.0037  0.0837  0.2329  0.2735  0.25
Horowitz 1949   37  0.3751  0.0043  0.0839  0.2136  0.3234  0.26
Indjic 1988   20  0.4174  0.0023  0.1028  0.3933  0.3231  0.35
Kapell 1951   15  0.4332  0.0020  0.1513  0.5516  0.4617  0.50
Kissin 1993   52  0.2929  0.0028  0.0833  0.3234  0.4527  0.38
Kushner 1989   18  0.414  0.055  0.1510  0.5916  0.559  0.57
Luisada 1991   22  0.4037  0.0031  0.0832  0.3343  0.2333  0.28
Lushtak 2004   49  0.3188  0.0059  0.0752  0.0728  0.2148  0.12
Malcuzynski 1961   77  0.1756  0.0075  0.0467  0.0476  0.0380  0.03
Magaloff 1978   67  0.2441  0.0054  0.0468  0.0452  0.0663  0.05
Magin 1975   44  0.3221  0.0040  0.0743  0.1638  0.3039  0.22
Michalowski 1933   35  0.3764  0.0025  0.0722  0.4621  0.4719  0.46
Milkina 1970   48  0.3183  0.0049  0.0846  0.0828  0.3941  0.18
Mohovich 1999   76  0.1879  0.0078  0.0377  0.0363  0.0577  0.04
Moravec 1969   27  0.3936  0.0033  0.0730  0.3520  0.4125  0.38
Morozova 2008   21  0.4044  0.0021  0.0817  0.5222  0.3821  0.44
Neighaus 1950   10  0.4530  0.009  0.1415  0.5326  0.3523  0.43
Niedzielski 1931   41  0.3465  0.0036  0.0835  0.2637  0.2236  0.24
Ohlsson 1999   17  0.425  0.047  0.1129  0.3827  0.3230  0.35
Osinska 1989   50  0.3116  0.0030  0.0741  0.1937  0.2937  0.23
Pachmann 1927   53  0.2852  0.0057  0.0654  0.0650  0.0758  0.06
Paderewski 1930   75  0.1970  0.0067  0.0471  0.0464  0.0665  0.05
Perlemuter 1992   71  0.2071  0.0066  0.0562  0.0565  0.0473  0.04
Pierdomenico 2008   24  0.4018  0.0035  0.0734  0.2817  0.5126  0.38
Poblocka 1999   11  0.4435  0.0016  0.127  0.6311  0.568  0.59
Rabcewiczowa 1932   68  0.2275  0.0079  0.0379  0.0365  0.0575  0.04
Rachmaninoff 1923   8  0.4611  0.0111  0.146  0.6711  0.705  0.68
Rangell 2001   42  0.3434  0.0045  0.0844  0.1533  0.2640  0.20
Richter 1976   7  0.4749  0.006  0.135  0.7023  0.714  0.70
Rosen 1989   25  0.4038  0.0013  0.1114  0.5522  0.5014  0.52
Rosenthal 1930   65  0.2445  0.0069  0.0473  0.0446  0.0860  0.06
Rosenthal 1931   85  0.0389  0.0088  0.0283  0.0270  0.0387  0.02
Rosenthal 1931b   84  0.0490  0.0087  0.0285  0.0269  0.0486  0.03
Rosenthal 1931c   80  0.1631  0.0072  0.0470  0.0447  0.0671  0.05
Rosenthal 1931d   86  0.0272  0.0086  0.0290  0.0274  0.0391  0.02
Rossi 2007   83  0.0957  0.0082  0.0382  0.0339  0.1257  0.06
Rubinstein 1939   39  0.3753  0.0041  0.0742  0.1924  0.2838  0.23
Rubinstein 1952   61  0.2650  0.0064  0.0560  0.0559  0.0572  0.05
Rubinstein 1966   30  0.3812  0.0146  0.0848  0.0872  0.0459  0.06
Schilhawsky 1960   82  0.1091  0.0083  0.0284  0.0267  0.0481  0.03
Shebanova 2002   9  0.468  0.0212  0.189  0.6036  0.4415  0.51
Smith 1975   60  0.2642  0.0070  0.0475  0.0443  0.1455  0.07
Sokolov 2002   57  0.2740  0.0060  0.0653  0.0644  0.1550  0.09
Sztompka 1959   36  0.3727  0.0044  0.0938  0.2150  0.0747  0.12
Tomsic 1995   62  0.2623  0.0038  0.0740  0.1940  0.1344  0.16
Uninsky 1932   23  0.4024  0.0034  0.0827  0.4046  0.0842  0.18
Uninsky 1971   45  0.3217  0.0039  0.0645  0.1539  0.1745  0.16
Wasowski 1980   2  0.576  0.044  0.462  0.823  0.791  0.80
Zak 1937   34  0.3733  0.0047  0.0847  0.0835  0.2746  0.15
Zak 1951   43  0.3339  0.0058  0.0749  0.0745  0.1151  0.09
Average   1  0.581  0.301  0.301  0.8231  0.2520  0.45
Random 1   90  -0.0480  0.0089  0.0289  0.0267  0.0389  0.02
Random 2   91  -0.0820  0.0084  0.0286  0.0252  0.0583  0.03
Random 3   89  -0.0366  0.0091  0.0191  0.0166  0.0390  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).