Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   23  0.4815  0.0135  0.0531  0.3373  0.0340  0.10
Anderszewski 2003   31  0.4636  0.0030  0.0623  0.3863  0.0432  0.12
Ashkenazy 1981   3  0.557  0.045  0.122  0.6652  0.0515  0.18
Bacha 2000   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Badura 1965   78  0.3252  0.0066  0.0472  0.0470  0.0474  0.04
Barbosa 1983   41  0.4343  0.0025  0.0624  0.3749  0.0623  0.15
Biret 1990   5  0.5327  0.0021  0.1018  0.4254  0.0620  0.16
Blet 2003   54  0.4040  0.0065  0.0561  0.0576  0.0372  0.04
Block 1995   46  0.4377  0.0032  0.0535  0.2537  0.1612  0.20
Blumental 1952   25  0.488  0.0419  0.1010  0.5235  0.158  0.28
Boshniakovich 1969   51  0.4226  0.0058  0.0555  0.0582  0.0375  0.04
Brailowsky 1960   9  0.5331  0.0018  0.1120  0.4121  0.424  0.41
Bunin 1987   77  0.3289  0.0083  0.0477  0.0487  0.0286  0.03
Bunin 1987b   79  0.3269  0.0082  0.0380  0.0386  0.0289  0.02
Chiu 1999   20  0.4944  0.0011  0.137  0.5326  0.362  0.44
Cohen 1997   28  0.4718  0.0122  0.0727  0.365  0.523  0.43
Cortot 1951   64  0.3857  0.0076  0.0469  0.0463  0.0477  0.04
Csalog 1996   39  0.4450  0.0040  0.0743  0.1437  0.2117  0.17
Czerny 1949   61  0.3817  0.0155  0.0746  0.0780  0.0356  0.05
Czerny 1990   45  0.4367  0.0050  0.0745  0.0784  0.0359  0.05
Duchoud 2007   38  0.4458  0.0049  0.0647  0.0670  0.0458  0.05
Ezaki 2006   6  0.533  0.086  0.123  0.6067  0.0421  0.15
Falvay 1989   13  0.5220  0.0124  0.0730  0.3466  0.0526  0.13
Farrell 1958   21  0.4953  0.0041  0.0838  0.2058  0.0539  0.10
Ferenczy 1958   48  0.4322  0.0136  0.0741  0.1547  0.0541  0.09
Fliere 1977   29  0.4737  0.0029  0.0729  0.3578  0.0335  0.10
Fou 1978   2  0.5514  0.0110  0.134  0.6054  0.0516  0.17
Francois 1956   52  0.4112  0.0148  0.0652  0.0659  0.0461  0.05
Friedman 1923   85  0.2674  0.0086  0.0383  0.0369  0.0579  0.04
Friedman 1923b   84  0.2687  0.0085  0.0381  0.0369  0.0487  0.03
Friedman 1930   86  0.2586  0.0084  0.0287  0.0279  0.0483  0.03
Garcia 2007   72  0.3549  0.0067  0.0471  0.0475  0.0384  0.03
Garcia 2007b   76  0.3479  0.0060  0.0556  0.0570  0.0478  0.04
Gierzod 1998   7  0.535  0.074  0.135  0.5844  0.1010  0.24
Gornostaeva 1994   36  0.4425  0.0057  0.0648  0.0675  0.0376  0.04
Groot 1988   17  0.5061  0.0028  0.0932  0.3369  0.0434  0.11
Harasiewicz 1955   66  0.3739  0.0042  0.0739  0.1783  0.0247  0.06
Hatto 1993   26  0.482  0.112  0.1712  0.5044  0.1011  0.22
Hatto 1997   19  0.4924  0.007  0.1316  0.4667  0.0425  0.14
Horowitz 1949   68  0.3785  0.0077  0.0473  0.0487  0.0280  0.03
Indjic 1988   22  0.4921  0.013  0.1313  0.4964  0.0519  0.16
Kapell 1951   34  0.4613  0.0134  0.0828  0.3573  0.0431  0.12
Kissin 1993   49  0.4284  0.0052  0.0650  0.0658  0.0552  0.05
Kushner 1989   11  0.5210  0.0113  0.1219  0.4258  0.0618  0.16
Luisada 1991   18  0.494  0.088  0.1111  0.5240  0.226  0.34
Lushtak 2004   40  0.4354  0.0043  0.0742  0.1580  0.0345  0.07
Malcuzynski 1961   35  0.4630  0.0045  0.0649  0.0652  0.0551  0.05
Magaloff 1978   15  0.5134  0.0020  0.1022  0.3963  0.0430  0.12
Magin 1975   62  0.3890  0.0051  0.0651  0.0669  0.0450  0.05
Michalowski 1933   87  0.2466  0.0070  0.0384  0.0367  0.0571  0.04
Milkina 1970   1  0.581  0.311  0.311  0.6831  0.331  0.47
Mohovich 1999   14  0.5233  0.0017  0.1015  0.4858  0.0524  0.15
Moravec 1969   42  0.4345  0.0056  0.0653  0.0657  0.0448  0.05
Morozova 2008   56  0.3964  0.0037  0.0640  0.1580  0.0442  0.08
Neighaus 1950   16  0.5072  0.0026  0.0725  0.3659  0.0529  0.13
Niedzielski 1931   59  0.3855  0.0059  0.0559  0.0562  0.0367  0.04
Ohlsson 1999   12  0.5211  0.0114  0.109  0.5361  0.0422  0.15
Osinska 1989   37  0.4468  0.0038  0.0737  0.2262  0.0536  0.10
Pachmann 1927   58  0.3838  0.0072  0.0385  0.0359  0.0569  0.04
Paderewski 1930   63  0.3828  0.0075  0.0476  0.0475  0.0382  0.03
Perlemuter 1992   75  0.3547  0.0063  0.0563  0.0572  0.0462  0.04
Pierdomenico 2008   69  0.3665  0.0068  0.0474  0.0462  0.0566  0.04
Poblocka 1999   50  0.4246  0.0033  0.0634  0.2680  0.0437  0.10
Rabcewiczowa 1932   53  0.4156  0.0053  0.0557  0.0572  0.0468  0.04
Rachmaninoff 1923   80  0.3162  0.0079  0.0564  0.0583  0.0365  0.04
Rangell 2001   32  0.4659  0.0039  0.0836  0.2357  0.0533  0.11
Richter 1976   81  0.3080  0.0081  0.0379  0.0372  0.0481  0.03
Rosen 1989   10  0.536  0.049  0.1314  0.4838  0.159  0.27
Rosenthal 1930   82  0.2988  0.0087  0.0475  0.0486  0.0285  0.03
Rosenthal 1931   74  0.3541  0.0074  0.0478  0.0447  0.0654  0.05
Rosenthal 1931b   65  0.3735  0.0069  0.0468  0.0445  0.0660  0.05
Rosenthal 1931c   70  0.3660  0.0078  0.0470  0.0484  0.0388  0.03
Rosenthal 1931d   60  0.3871  0.0073  0.0386  0.0336  0.1943  0.08
Rossi 2007   83  0.2763  0.0080  0.0565  0.0570  0.0464  0.04
Rubinstein 1939   44  0.4342  0.0047  0.0562  0.0523  0.3227  0.13
Rubinstein 1952   24  0.4875  0.0016  0.1017  0.4425  0.365  0.40
Rubinstein 1966   4  0.5416  0.0115  0.098  0.5341  0.187  0.31
Schilhawsky 1960   67  0.3751  0.0061  0.0567  0.0578  0.0473  0.04
Shebanova 2002   8  0.5381  0.0012  0.126  0.5454  0.0614  0.18
Smith 1975   43  0.4319  0.0131  0.0633  0.2756  0.0438  0.10
Sokolov 2002   47  0.4329  0.0054  0.0554  0.0585  0.0363  0.04
Sztompka 1959   55  0.3983  0.0071  0.0382  0.0366  0.0570  0.04
Tomsic 1995   33  0.4632  0.0044  0.0644  0.1167  0.0544  0.07
Uninsky 1932   73  0.3548  0.0064  0.0566  0.0563  0.0555  0.05
Uninsky 1971   57  0.399  0.0246  0.0558  0.0568  0.0553  0.05
Wasowski 1980   71  0.3673  0.0062  0.0560  0.0551  0.0649  0.05
Zak 1937   27  0.4876  0.0027  0.0726  0.3656  0.0528  0.13
Zak 1951   30  0.4623  0.0123  0.0621  0.3945  0.0913  0.19
Random 1   90  -0.1178  0.0090  0.0190  0.0185  0.0290  0.01
Random 2   89  -0.0270  0.0089  0.0288  0.0239  0.1457  0.05
Random 3   88  0.0182  0.0088  0.0289  0.0223  0.2746  0.07

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).