Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   22  0.5254  0.0040  0.0838  0.2363  0.0441  0.10
Anderszewski 2003   33  0.4940  0.0019  0.0922  0.3940  0.1322  0.23
Ashkenazy 1981   21  0.5314  0.0113  0.0713  0.4740  0.1818  0.29
Bacha 2000   79  0.3083  0.0077  0.0472  0.0479  0.0371  0.03
Badura 1965   37  0.4826  0.0032  0.0729  0.3236  0.2717  0.29
Barbosa 1983   65  0.4066  0.0064  0.0469  0.0483  0.0465  0.04
Biret 1990   73  0.3674  0.0073  0.0471  0.0488  0.0282  0.03
Blet 2003   31  0.5059  0.0054  0.0746  0.0765  0.0454  0.05
Block 1995   12  0.5525  0.0020  0.1227  0.3525  0.2715  0.31
Blumental 1952   87  0.2478  0.0083  0.0285  0.0277  0.0388  0.02
Boshniakovich 1969   6  0.5813  0.017  0.146  0.5816  0.465  0.52
Brailowsky 1960   56  0.4251  0.0068  0.0650  0.0668  0.0452  0.05
Bunin 1987   20  0.5317  0.019  0.1212  0.4812  0.499  0.48
Bunin 1987b   23  0.5253  0.008  0.1111  0.4812  0.498  0.48
Chiu 1999   59  0.4145  0.0048  0.0647  0.0644  0.1046  0.08
Cohen 1997   86  0.2555  0.0081  0.0382  0.0376  0.0480  0.03
Cortot 1951   53  0.4461  0.0053  0.0648  0.0672  0.0457  0.05
Csalog 1996   63  0.4029  0.0047  0.0554  0.0542  0.1447  0.08
Czerny 1949   41  0.4772  0.0036  0.0642  0.1654  0.0640  0.10
Czerny 1990   19  0.5321  0.0035  0.0637  0.2365  0.0443  0.10
Duchoud 2007   50  0.4485  0.0043  0.0841  0.1641  0.1529  0.15
Ezaki 2006   29  0.5080  0.0044  0.0843  0.1577  0.0445  0.08
Falvay 1989   58  0.4239  0.0072  0.0466  0.0484  0.0375  0.03
Farrell 1958   71  0.3665  0.0074  0.0465  0.0470  0.0461  0.04
Ferenczy 1958   61  0.4189  0.0070  0.0651  0.0652  0.0455  0.05
Fliere 1977   1  0.644  0.093  0.201  0.7030  0.394  0.52
Fou 1978   26  0.5242  0.0037  0.0636  0.2556  0.0537  0.11
Francois 1956   74  0.3488  0.0082  0.0381  0.0360  0.0485  0.03
Friedman 1923   80  0.3028  0.0076  0.0373  0.0349  0.0670  0.04
Friedman 1923b   77  0.3020  0.0075  0.0560  0.0551  0.0556  0.05
Friedman 1930   70  0.3734  0.0060  0.0377  0.0373  0.0478  0.03
Garcia 2007   64  0.4030  0.0050  0.0555  0.0530  0.2142  0.10
Garcia 2007b   76  0.3038  0.0061  0.0467  0.0479  0.0386  0.03
Gierzod 1998   40  0.4764  0.0042  0.0740  0.1779  0.0351  0.07
Gornostaeva 1994   52  0.4476  0.0066  0.0376  0.0360  0.0481  0.03
Groot 1988   27  0.5127  0.0031  0.0731  0.3044  0.1026  0.17
Harasiewicz 1955   4  0.622  0.202  0.275  0.5920  0.446  0.51
Hatto 1993   51  0.4416  0.0115  0.0715  0.4560  0.0530  0.15
Hatto 1997   62  0.4163  0.0028  0.0834  0.2750  0.0635  0.13
Horowitz 1949   14  0.5560  0.0010  0.1310  0.5011  0.583  0.54
Indjic 1988   54  0.4418  0.0016  0.0918  0.4268  0.0533  0.14
Kapell 1951   13  0.557  0.056  0.137  0.5538  0.1914  0.32
Kissin 1993   2  0.635  0.085  0.223  0.6224  0.407  0.50
Kushner 1989   8  0.5610  0.0221  0.0926  0.3663  0.0534  0.13
Luisada 1991   42  0.4741  0.0058  0.0562  0.0582  0.0358  0.04
Lushtak 2004   30  0.5019  0.0039  0.0832  0.2974  0.0438  0.11
Malcuzynski 1961   11  0.5558  0.0018  0.0820  0.4039  0.1720  0.26
Magaloff 1978   38  0.4737  0.0046  0.0649  0.0676  0.0453  0.05
Magin 1975   7  0.578  0.0312  0.139  0.5323  0.3510  0.43
Michalowski 1933   66  0.4056  0.0045  0.0745  0.0746  0.0850  0.07
Milkina 1970   46  0.4648  0.0055  0.0561  0.0576  0.0462  0.04
Mohovich 1999   39  0.4736  0.0051  0.0652  0.0677  0.0367  0.04
Moravec 1969   72  0.3669  0.0080  0.0384  0.0369  0.0472  0.03
Morozova 2008   15  0.5547  0.0023  0.0925  0.3744  0.1024  0.19
Neighaus 1950   34  0.4931  0.0041  0.0933  0.2869  0.0536  0.12
Niedzielski 1931   43  0.4624  0.0033  0.0635  0.2628  0.3119  0.28
Ohlsson 1999   35  0.4822  0.0029  0.0824  0.3745  0.0825  0.17
Osinska 1989   45  0.4652  0.0059  0.0375  0.0386  0.0373  0.03
Pachmann 1927   36  0.4833  0.0049  0.0556  0.0516  0.4628  0.15
Paderewski 1930   55  0.4367  0.0063  0.0470  0.0470  0.0464  0.04
Perlemuter 1992   24  0.5286  0.0038  0.0630  0.3136  0.2021  0.25
Pierdomenico 2008   60  0.4135  0.0069  0.0553  0.0569  0.0460  0.04
Poblocka 1999   3  0.633  0.104  0.272  0.658  0.502  0.57
Rabcewiczowa 1932   81  0.2946  0.0084  0.0287  0.0268  0.0476  0.03
Rachmaninoff 1923   47  0.4573  0.0034  0.0639  0.1958  0.0539  0.10
Rangell 2001   68  0.3979  0.0062  0.0468  0.0467  0.0468  0.04
Richter 1976   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Rosen 1989   48  0.4423  0.0065  0.0374  0.0375  0.0379  0.03
Rosenthal 1930   57  0.4270  0.0052  0.0558  0.0543  0.1348  0.08
Rosenthal 1931   82  0.2981  0.0079  0.0380  0.0374  0.0377  0.03
Rosenthal 1931b   84  0.2790  0.0085  0.0286  0.0266  0.0483  0.03
Rosenthal 1931c   75  0.3368  0.0078  0.0379  0.0369  0.0484  0.03
Rosenthal 1931d   85  0.2682  0.0086  0.0383  0.0388  0.0290  0.02
Rossi 2007   83  0.2787  0.0087  0.0378  0.0364  0.0474  0.03
Rubinstein 1939   78  0.3011  0.0114  0.0744  0.1278  0.0449  0.07
Rubinstein 1952   69  0.3812  0.0156  0.0463  0.0456  0.0569  0.04
Rubinstein 1966   67  0.4057  0.0071  0.0464  0.0479  0.0466  0.04
Schilhawsky 1960   5  0.601  0.221  0.224  0.626  0.581  0.60
Shebanova 2002   17  0.546  0.0626  0.1116  0.4342  0.1223  0.23
Smith 1975   49  0.4477  0.0067  0.0559  0.0584  0.0359  0.04
Sokolov 2002   25  0.5215  0.0117  0.0721  0.4034  0.2116  0.29
Sztompka 1959   10  0.569  0.0225  0.0919  0.4154  0.0627  0.16
Tomsic 1995   44  0.4643  0.0057  0.0557  0.0575  0.0463  0.04
Uninsky 1932   18  0.5344  0.0024  0.0917  0.4331  0.2613  0.33
Uninsky 1971   9  0.5650  0.0011  0.188  0.5426  0.3411  0.43
Wasowski 1980   16  0.5432  0.0022  0.0814  0.4524  0.3012  0.37
Zak 1937   32  0.4962  0.0030  0.0628  0.3549  0.0631  0.14
Zak 1951   28  0.5175  0.0027  0.0923  0.3960  0.0532  0.14
Random 1   89  -0.0449  0.0088  0.0288  0.0210  0.3844  0.09
Random 2   90  -0.0784  0.0090  0.0190  0.0149  0.0587  0.02
Random 3   88  -0.0471  0.0089  0.0189  0.0144  0.0689  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).