Cortot 1951

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   35  0.6342  0.0043  0.0643  0.0655  0.0553  0.05
Ashkenazy 1981   14  0.6644  0.0018  0.0813  0.4456  0.0616  0.16
Beliavsky 2004   37  0.627  0.0228  0.0731  0.2155  0.0433  0.09
BenOr 1989   32  0.6460  0.0037  0.0835  0.0863  0.0443  0.06
Biret 1990   11  0.6659  0.0019  0.0815  0.4463  0.0518  0.15
Blet 2003   39  0.6140  0.0050  0.0646  0.0664  0.0359  0.04
Block 1995   13  0.6616  0.0031  0.1029  0.2243  0.0728  0.12
Brailowsky 1960   44  0.6022  0.0054  0.0552  0.0558  0.0456  0.04
Chiu 1999   22  0.6547  0.0016  0.0716  0.4244  0.078  0.17
Clidat 1994   7  0.672  0.084  0.227  0.5429  0.093  0.22
Cohen 1997   55  0.5710  0.0155  0.0461  0.0428  0.1934  0.09
Coop 1987   16  0.6639  0.0015  0.1014  0.4450  0.0615  0.16
Cortot 1951   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Czerny 1949   18  0.6525  0.0011  0.1411  0.4852  0.0611  0.17
Czerny 1949b   27  0.648  0.019  0.178  0.5151  0.069  0.17
Ezaki 2006   17  0.6623  0.0026  0.0925  0.3159  0.0525  0.12
Falvay 1989   5  0.6924  0.0010  0.1610  0.4957  0.0513  0.16
Ferenczy 1958   59  0.5456  0.0063  0.0647  0.0661  0.0449  0.05
Fiorentino 1962   43  0.6166  0.0047  0.0458  0.0460  0.0563  0.04
Fliere 1977   20  0.6530  0.0024  0.0823  0.3559  0.0426  0.12
Fou 1978   28  0.6446  0.0020  0.0917  0.4259  0.0423  0.13
Francois 1956   61  0.5255  0.0062  0.0460  0.0455  0.0564  0.04
Hatto 1997   30  0.6450  0.0036  0.0737  0.0761  0.0540  0.06
Horowitz 1971   42  0.6131  0.0039  0.0644  0.0635  0.0742  0.06
Horowitz 1985   60  0.5243  0.0058  0.0457  0.0451  0.0555  0.04
Indjic 2001   21  0.6554  0.0035  0.1033  0.1058  0.0538  0.07
Kapell 1951   8  0.6758  0.0012  0.169  0.5153  0.0610  0.17
Kiepura 1999   36  0.6229  0.0051  0.0551  0.0549  0.0544  0.05
Kilenyi 1937   54  0.5864  0.0049  0.0740  0.0761  0.0450  0.05
Kissin 1993   3  0.706  0.022  0.373  0.7256  0.055  0.19
Kitain 1937   63  0.4428  0.0057  0.0463  0.0427  0.2235  0.09
Kushner 1990   45  0.6038  0.0046  0.0556  0.0552  0.0547  0.05
Levy 1951   38  0.6234  0.0014  0.1121  0.3761  0.0521  0.14
Luisada 1990   25  0.6545  0.0038  0.0739  0.0753  0.0641  0.06
Lushtak 2004   2  0.714  0.053  0.272  0.7525  0.291  0.47
Lympany 1968   26  0.6521  0.0025  0.1124  0.3346  0.0619  0.14
Magaloff 1977   31  0.6433  0.0029  0.0828  0.2548  0.0627  0.12
Magaloff 1977b   29  0.6415  0.0030  0.1127  0.2643  0.0724  0.13
Magin 1975   12  0.6614  0.0032  0.1032  0.2049  0.0629  0.11
Milkina 1970   15  0.6636  0.0027  0.0830  0.2259  0.0432  0.09
Mohovich 1999   48  0.6026  0.0042  0.0549  0.0562  0.0362  0.04
Nadelmann 1956   40  0.6148  0.0041  0.0555  0.0563  0.0458  0.04
Ohlsson 1999   46  0.6063  0.0045  0.0741  0.0759  0.0446  0.05
Olejniczac 1990   41  0.6161  0.0048  0.0738  0.0760  0.0452  0.05
Olejniczak 1991   51  0.5957  0.0052  0.0554  0.0559  0.0545  0.05
Osinska 1989   4  0.7019  0.007  0.204  0.6460  0.0412  0.16
Paderewski 1912   50  0.599  0.0117  0.0726  0.2961  0.0430  0.11
Perahia 1994   58  0.5411  0.0159  0.0548  0.0562  0.0461  0.04
Perlemuter 1986   52  0.5951  0.0053  0.0550  0.0548  0.0548  0.05
Poblocka 1999   9  0.6732  0.0023  0.0922  0.3750  0.0520  0.14
Rangell 2001   23  0.6535  0.0021  0.0718  0.4035  0.114  0.21
Risler 1920   62  0.5065  0.0060  0.0459  0.0455  0.0557  0.04
Rosen 1989   57  0.5553  0.0061  0.0462  0.0461  0.0365  0.03
Rubinstein 1939   49  0.5912  0.0133  0.0934  0.0941  0.0736  0.08
Rubinstein 1952   33  0.6320  0.0013  0.1720  0.3940  0.0522  0.14
Rubinstein 1966   53  0.5862  0.0056  0.0553  0.0553  0.0460  0.04
Rummel 1943   56  0.5613  0.0140  0.0645  0.0656  0.0454  0.05
Shebanova 2002   34  0.6327  0.0044  0.0642  0.0661  0.0451  0.05
Smith 1975   19  0.6518  0.008  0.215  0.6260  0.0414  0.16
Szpilman 1948   47  0.6037  0.0034  0.0836  0.0856  0.0539  0.06
Uninsky 1971   6  0.675  0.035  0.256  0.6036  0.066  0.19
Wasowski 1980   10  0.673  0.076  0.2012  0.4649  0.067  0.17
Weissenberg 1971   24  0.6517  0.0022  0.1019  0.3952  0.0617  0.15
Average   1  0.771  0.641  0.631  0.8856  0.062  0.23
Random 1    66  0.0052  0.0064  0.0264  0.026  0.4631  0.10
Random 2   65  0.0041  0.0065  0.0265  0.0254  0.0366  0.02
Random 3   64  0.0049  0.0066  0.0166  0.014  0.6037  0.08

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).