Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   34  0.4258  0.0021  0.0619  0.3857  0.0437  0.12
Anderszewski 2003   23  0.4541  0.0034  0.0721  0.3742  0.1221  0.21
Ashkenazy 1981   4  0.522  0.102  0.181  0.7024  0.412  0.54
Bacha 2000   76  0.2419  0.0169  0.0567  0.0584  0.0357  0.04
Badura 1965   38  0.4070  0.0052  0.0749  0.0756  0.0549  0.06
Barbosa 1983   79  0.2479  0.0068  0.0378  0.0377  0.0482  0.03
Biret 1990   41  0.4036  0.0043  0.0941  0.1951  0.0641  0.11
Blet 2003   31  0.4322  0.0126  0.0631  0.3241  0.1122  0.19
Block 1995   61  0.3446  0.0058  0.0562  0.0558  0.0470  0.04
Blumental 1952   37  0.4120  0.0120  0.0830  0.3332  0.1820  0.24
Boshniakovich 1969   10  0.4951  0.0025  0.0634  0.2748  0.0634  0.13
Brailowsky 1960   75  0.2780  0.0080  0.0386  0.0366  0.0560  0.04
Bunin 1987   45  0.3823  0.0129  0.0628  0.3428  0.3116  0.32
Bunin 1987b   46  0.3864  0.0031  0.0629  0.3327  0.3215  0.32
Chiu 1999   62  0.3326  0.0054  0.0564  0.0560  0.0462  0.04
Cohen 1997   85  0.1838  0.0081  0.0387  0.0382  0.0387  0.03
Cortot 1951   43  0.3987  0.0037  0.0743  0.1834  0.1825  0.18
Csalog 1996   84  0.2142  0.0078  0.0476  0.0485  0.0384  0.03
Czerny 1949   21  0.4512  0.0111  0.1412  0.4438  0.1719  0.27
Czerny 1990   20  0.4535  0.0032  0.0626  0.3562  0.0438  0.12
Duchoud 2007   36  0.4113  0.0119  0.0818  0.3920  0.408  0.39
Ezaki 2006   51  0.3868  0.0057  0.0651  0.0678  0.0356  0.04
Falvay 1989   82  0.2254  0.0075  0.0475  0.0464  0.0563  0.04
Farrell 1958   73  0.2982  0.0071  0.0658  0.0683  0.0278  0.03
Ferenczy 1958   59  0.3483  0.0035  0.0842  0.1937  0.1824  0.18
Fliere 1977   7  0.5017  0.0123  0.0623  0.3671  0.0435  0.12
Fou 1978   72  0.2963  0.0067  0.0377  0.0384  0.0379  0.03
Francois 1956   50  0.3856  0.0047  0.0653  0.0677  0.0375  0.04
Friedman 1923   40  0.4062  0.0036  0.0638  0.2417  0.3917  0.31
Friedman 1923b   35  0.4230  0.0033  0.0632  0.3117  0.4213  0.36
Friedman 1930   8  0.4943  0.0022  0.0617  0.4021  0.417  0.40
Garcia 2007   53  0.3660  0.0055  0.0652  0.0656  0.0553  0.05
Garcia 2007b   30  0.4315  0.0130  0.0625  0.3512  0.449  0.39
Gierzod 1998   27  0.4372  0.0024  0.0615  0.4047  0.0726  0.17
Gornostaeva 1994   32  0.4337  0.0044  0.0844  0.1568  0.0444  0.08
Groot 1988   65  0.3355  0.0061  0.0566  0.0576  0.0373  0.04
Harasiewicz 1955   14  0.4824  0.0118  0.0716  0.4055  0.0531  0.14
Hatto 1993   44  0.3947  0.0014  0.1024  0.3652  0.0629  0.15
Hatto 1997   57  0.3573  0.0015  0.0835  0.2657  0.0540  0.11
Horowitz 1949   52  0.3649  0.0063  0.0560  0.0559  0.0467  0.04
Indjic 1988   48  0.3866  0.0012  0.1127  0.3558  0.0533  0.13
Kapell 1951   16  0.4711  0.027  0.2310  0.4732  0.2812  0.36
Kissin 1993   56  0.3684  0.0064  0.0750  0.0779  0.0352  0.05
Kushner 1989   19  0.463  0.109  0.138  0.4849  0.0723  0.18
Luisada 1991   28  0.4316  0.0138  0.0633  0.2954  0.0632  0.13
Lushtak 2004   68  0.3190  0.0066  0.0473  0.0477  0.0386  0.03
Malcuzynski 1961   25  0.447  0.0441  0.0837  0.2549  0.0539  0.11
Magaloff 1978   54  0.3627  0.0062  0.0559  0.0587  0.0276  0.03
Magin 1975   5  0.514  0.108  0.127  0.5133  0.2114  0.33
Michalowski 1933   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Milkina 1970   58  0.3439  0.0060  0.0569  0.0578  0.0466  0.04
Mohovich 1999   70  0.3086  0.0070  0.0561  0.0579  0.0371  0.04
Moravec 1969   67  0.3128  0.0059  0.0565  0.0573  0.0458  0.04
Morozova 2008   29  0.4333  0.0039  0.0736  0.2550  0.0636  0.12
Neighaus 1950   13  0.4821  0.0116  0.0713  0.4345  0.0727  0.17
Niedzielski 1931   49  0.3844  0.0053  0.0657  0.0660  0.0365  0.04
Ohlsson 1999   15  0.4831  0.0013  0.1111  0.4549  0.0528  0.15
Osinska 1989   26  0.4448  0.0050  0.0847  0.0853  0.0645  0.07
Pachmann 1927   74  0.2934  0.0077  0.0379  0.0384  0.0381  0.03
Paderewski 1930   9  0.4910  0.0217  0.0814  0.409  0.3710  0.38
Perlemuter 1992   42  0.3976  0.0046  0.0656  0.0675  0.0359  0.04
Pierdomenico 2008   64  0.3353  0.0072  0.0470  0.0470  0.0464  0.04
Poblocka 1999   12  0.486  0.046  0.199  0.4826  0.336  0.40
Rabcewiczowa 1932   11  0.4871  0.0028  0.0722  0.3628  0.2418  0.29
Rachmaninoff 1923   47  0.3814  0.0148  0.0845  0.0871  0.0447  0.06
Rangell 2001   71  0.2940  0.0073  0.0568  0.0586  0.0372  0.04
Richter 1976   39  0.4018  0.0149  0.0846  0.0845  0.0746  0.07
Rosen 1989   24  0.4457  0.0042  0.0840  0.2086  0.0343  0.08
Rosenthal 1930   55  0.3667  0.0065  0.0471  0.0463  0.0569  0.04
Rosenthal 1931   80  0.2389  0.0084  0.0384  0.0377  0.0383  0.03
Rosenthal 1931b   77  0.2477  0.0079  0.0381  0.0379  0.0389  0.03
Rosenthal 1931c   66  0.3250  0.0074  0.0563  0.0582  0.0374  0.04
Rosenthal 1931d   81  0.2365  0.0083  0.0385  0.0383  0.0388  0.03
Rossi 2007   69  0.3029  0.0076  0.0380  0.0358  0.0561  0.04
Rubinstein 1939   87  0.1474  0.0087  0.0474  0.0481  0.0377  0.03
Rubinstein 1952   86  0.1745  0.0086  0.0383  0.0366  0.0490  0.03
Rubinstein 1966   83  0.2278  0.0085  0.0472  0.0473  0.0468  0.04
Schilhawsky 1960   3  0.528  0.025  0.253  0.5713  0.521  0.54
Shebanova 2002   22  0.4559  0.0027  0.0520  0.3762  0.0530  0.14
Smith 1975   17  0.4725  0.0040  0.0839  0.2269  0.0442  0.09
Sokolov 2002   18  0.4632  0.0010  0.145  0.5433  0.2511  0.37
Sztompka 1959   1  0.571  0.251  0.252  0.6314  0.453  0.53
Tomsic 1995   78  0.2485  0.0082  0.0382  0.0386  0.0380  0.03
Uninsky 1932   2  0.549  0.024  0.196  0.5212  0.504  0.51
Uninsky 1971   6  0.515  0.083  0.174  0.5421  0.395  0.46
Wasowski 1980   33  0.4261  0.0045  0.0655  0.0672  0.0450  0.05
Zak 1937   63  0.3352  0.0056  0.0654  0.0647  0.0648  0.06
Zak 1951   60  0.3481  0.0051  0.0748  0.0779  0.0451  0.05
Random 1   90  -0.0575  0.0089  0.0189  0.0127  0.2254  0.05
Random 2   89  -0.0188  0.0088  0.0188  0.0142  0.1285  0.03
Random 3   88  0.0069  0.0090  0.0190  0.0125  0.2655  0.05

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).