Farrell 1958

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   29  0.4711  0.0252  0.0546  0.0571  0.0362  0.04
Anderszewski 2003   59  0.4086  0.0054  0.0449  0.0478  0.0377  0.03
Ashkenazy 1981   44  0.4446  0.0048  0.0461  0.0468  0.0465  0.04
Bacha 2000   57  0.4140  0.0081  0.0374  0.0363  0.0467  0.03
Badura 1965   85  0.2575  0.0085  0.0456  0.0480  0.0382  0.03
Barbosa 1983   67  0.3882  0.0049  0.0457  0.0454  0.0558  0.04
Biret 1990   2  0.642  0.083  0.393  0.6814  0.501  0.58
Blet 2003   37  0.4651  0.0042  0.0541  0.1672  0.0447  0.08
Block 1995   61  0.4019  0.0120  0.0730  0.2741  0.1117  0.17
Blumental 1952   77  0.3136  0.0058  0.0462  0.0454  0.0564  0.04
Boshniakovich 1969   46  0.4339  0.0021  0.0826  0.2939  0.1614  0.22
Brailowsky 1960   20  0.509  0.0230  0.0831  0.2647  0.0625  0.12
Bunin 1987   14  0.5137  0.0029  0.1319  0.3661  0.0429  0.12
Bunin 1987b   12  0.5115  0.0128  0.0918  0.3660  0.0428  0.12
Chiu 1999   38  0.4624  0.008  0.0813  0.4441  0.179  0.27
Cohen 1997   69  0.3767  0.0046  0.0547  0.0532  0.2334  0.11
Cortot 1951   9  0.5242  0.0015  0.098  0.4817  0.364  0.42
Csalog 1996   53  0.4332  0.0079  0.0376  0.0368  0.0476  0.03
Czerny 1949   36  0.4645  0.0034  0.0734  0.2352  0.0533  0.11
Czerny 1990   50  0.4387  0.0071  0.0373  0.0373  0.0484  0.03
Duchoud 2007   5  0.544  0.0416  0.0821  0.3439  0.1811  0.25
Ezaki 2006   41  0.4520  0.0144  0.0544  0.1079  0.0352  0.05
Falvay 1989   8  0.525  0.045  0.117  0.4948  0.0616  0.17
Farrell 1958   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Ferenczy 1958   39  0.4654  0.0053  0.0452  0.0440  0.1450  0.07
Fliere 1977   23  0.4983  0.0040  0.0739  0.1869  0.0445  0.08
Fou 1978   28  0.4710  0.029  0.1014  0.4056  0.0520  0.14
Francois 1956   30  0.4721  0.0127  0.0722  0.3349  0.0524  0.13
Friedman 1923   82  0.2757  0.0061  0.0372  0.0328  0.2644  0.09
Friedman 1923b   80  0.2722  0.0159  0.0455  0.0429  0.2736  0.10
Friedman 1930   84  0.2574  0.0062  0.0459  0.0469  0.0460  0.04
Garcia 2007   87  0.2462  0.0082  0.0380  0.0361  0.0481  0.03
Garcia 2007b   83  0.2664  0.0077  0.0458  0.0433  0.2438  0.10
Gierzod 1998   45  0.4441  0.0063  0.0377  0.0364  0.0480  0.03
Gornostaeva 1994   6  0.5427  0.0012  0.0524  0.3334  0.2210  0.27
Groot 1988   19  0.5068  0.0037  0.0633  0.2460  0.0437  0.10
Harasiewicz 1955   74  0.3379  0.0033  0.0632  0.2579  0.0343  0.09
Hatto 1993   79  0.2888  0.0086  0.0289  0.0288  0.0390  0.02
Hatto 1997   60  0.4089  0.0072  0.0364  0.0341  0.1151  0.06
Horowitz 1949   25  0.497  0.0317  0.0812  0.4438  0.1213  0.23
Indjic 1988   78  0.2984  0.0087  0.0365  0.0374  0.0375  0.03
Kapell 1951   7  0.5218  0.0126  0.0723  0.3347  0.0719  0.15
Kissin 1993   68  0.3752  0.0060  0.0368  0.0368  0.0473  0.03
Kushner 1989   47  0.4343  0.0065  0.0383  0.0380  0.0370  0.03
Luisada 1991   27  0.4873  0.0043  0.0642  0.1451  0.0639  0.09
Lushtak 2004   17  0.5014  0.016  0.135  0.5455  0.0518  0.16
Malcuzynski 1961   18  0.5053  0.0047  0.0454  0.0474  0.0371  0.03
Magaloff 1978   16  0.5023  0.0022  0.0815  0.3972  0.0331  0.11
Magin 1975   81  0.2769  0.0088  0.0384  0.0387  0.0287  0.02
Michalowski 1933   86  0.2590  0.0070  0.0382  0.0372  0.0472  0.03
Milkina 1970   10  0.5158  0.0038  0.0638  0.1973  0.0440  0.09
Mohovich 1999   56  0.4160  0.0074  0.0463  0.0487  0.0283  0.03
Moravec 1969   40  0.4634  0.0051  0.0451  0.0476  0.0368  0.03
Morozova 2008   33  0.4633  0.0018  0.0616  0.3752  0.0522  0.14
Neighaus 1950   3  0.611  0.421  0.411  0.7023  0.412  0.54
Niedzielski 1931   42  0.4565  0.0055  0.0448  0.0451  0.0557  0.04
Ohlsson 1999   11  0.5144  0.0036  0.0737  0.2077  0.0346  0.08
Osinska 1989   22  0.4976  0.0011  0.0610  0.4634  0.178  0.28
Pachmann 1927   66  0.3935  0.0031  0.0735  0.2154  0.0535  0.10
Paderewski 1930   52  0.438  0.0310  0.0829  0.2728  0.2112  0.24
Perlemuter 1992   75  0.3312  0.0219  0.0627  0.2970  0.0430  0.11
Pierdomenico 2008   62  0.3955  0.0057  0.0450  0.0464  0.0456  0.04
Poblocka 1999   13  0.5130  0.0025  0.0620  0.3565  0.0426  0.12
Rabcewiczowa 1932   34  0.4647  0.0013  0.0611  0.4525  0.393  0.42
Rachmaninoff 1923   35  0.466  0.047  0.146  0.5232  0.206  0.32
Rangell 2001   24  0.4928  0.0035  0.0636  0.2056  0.0442  0.09
Richter 1976   76  0.3185  0.0083  0.0287  0.0282  0.0388  0.02
Rosen 1989   15  0.5049  0.0032  0.0628  0.2942  0.1415  0.20
Rosenthal 1930   48  0.4338  0.0056  0.0453  0.0462  0.0463  0.04
Rosenthal 1931   73  0.3472  0.0076  0.0367  0.0347  0.0659  0.04
Rosenthal 1931b   72  0.3456  0.0068  0.0379  0.0360  0.0485  0.03
Rosenthal 1931c   58  0.4161  0.0073  0.0370  0.0370  0.0386  0.03
Rosenthal 1931d   71  0.3648  0.0075  0.0381  0.0348  0.0566  0.04
Rossi 2007   88  0.1166  0.0084  0.0375  0.0340  0.1053  0.05
Rubinstein 1939   51  0.4325  0.0050  0.0460  0.0419  0.3927  0.12
Rubinstein 1952   64  0.3980  0.0080  0.0369  0.0349  0.0755  0.05
Rubinstein 1966   26  0.4813  0.0141  0.0543  0.1370  0.0449  0.07
Schilhawsky 1960   65  0.3977  0.0067  0.0378  0.0373  0.0378  0.03
Shebanova 2002   63  0.3981  0.0078  0.0386  0.0380  0.0379  0.03
Smith 1975   4  0.5417  0.014  0.254  0.6241  0.147  0.29
Sokolov 2002   49  0.4391  0.0069  0.0366  0.0379  0.0369  0.03
Sztompka 1959   32  0.4770  0.0039  0.0640  0.1856  0.0541  0.09
Tomsic 1995   43  0.4531  0.0045  0.0545  0.1077  0.0354  0.05
Uninsky 1932   70  0.3659  0.0066  0.0385  0.0347  0.0661  0.04
Uninsky 1971   55  0.4229  0.0064  0.0371  0.0372  0.0374  0.03
Wasowski 1980   21  0.5016  0.0114  0.089  0.4722  0.335  0.39
Zak 1937   31  0.4750  0.0023  0.0917  0.3749  0.0521  0.14
Zak 1951   54  0.4226  0.0024  0.0725  0.3268  0.0432  0.11
Average   1  0.653  0.072  0.282  0.7079  0.0323  0.14
Random 1   91  -0.0263  0.0090  0.0190  0.0165  0.0389  0.02
Random 2   89  0.0171  0.0089  0.0288  0.0220  0.3248  0.08
Random 3   90  0.0078  0.0091  0.0191  0.0181  0.0291  0.01

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).