Chiu 1999

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   21  0.5925  0.0125  0.0425  0.2985  0.0345  0.09
Anderszewski 2003   50  0.4873  0.0064  0.0456  0.0483  0.0381  0.03
Ashkenazy 1981   16  0.626  0.0415  0.1411  0.4839  0.1818  0.29
Bacha 2000   17  0.6114  0.0110  0.118  0.514  0.524  0.51
Badura 1965   42  0.5118  0.0158  0.0372  0.0357  0.0566  0.04
Barbosa 1983   1  0.721  0.271  0.261  0.661  0.721  0.69
Biret 1990   11  0.6312  0.017  0.119  0.5022  0.319  0.39
Blet 2003   28  0.5672  0.0047  0.0745  0.0766  0.0457  0.05
Block 1995   59  0.4610  0.0229  0.0544  0.0935  0.1733  0.12
Blumental 1952   31  0.5631  0.0045  0.0647  0.0621  0.2238  0.11
Boshniakovich 1969   47  0.4929  0.0054  0.0459  0.0458  0.0567  0.04
Brailowsky 1960   6  0.6667  0.0013  0.107  0.516  0.542  0.52
Bunin 1987   68  0.4278  0.0070  0.0377  0.0356  0.0568  0.04
Bunin 1987b   70  0.4158  0.0069  0.0375  0.0355  0.0559  0.04
Chiu 1999   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Cohen 1997   46  0.4911  0.0160  0.0371  0.0316  0.3141  0.10
Cortot 1951   71  0.4136  0.0082  0.0464  0.0479  0.0470  0.04
Csalog 1996   80  0.3619  0.0126  0.0441  0.1524  0.2924  0.21
Czerny 1949   62  0.4586  0.0074  0.0386  0.0372  0.0483  0.03
Czerny 1990   20  0.5926  0.0131  0.0523  0.3172  0.0342  0.10
Duchoud 2007   44  0.5035  0.0042  0.0737  0.1837  0.1626  0.17
Ezaki 2006   5  0.6716  0.0118  0.1115  0.4647  0.0625  0.17
Falvay 1989   12  0.6356  0.0021  0.0622  0.3116  0.4310  0.37
Farrell 1958   22  0.5930  0.0033  0.0533  0.2037  0.1227  0.15
Ferenczy 1958   76  0.4053  0.0071  0.0378  0.0385  0.0382  0.03
Fliere 1977   13  0.634  0.075  0.132  0.6139  0.1717  0.32
Fou 1978   8  0.6523  0.0114  0.1212  0.4829  0.2711  0.36
Francois 1956   54  0.4760  0.0050  0.0454  0.0469  0.0389  0.03
Friedman 1923   75  0.4038  0.0084  0.0379  0.0358  0.0573  0.04
Friedman 1923b   74  0.4064  0.0083  0.0382  0.0352  0.0669  0.04
Friedman 1930   57  0.4620  0.0168  0.0373  0.0361  0.0564  0.04
Garcia 2007   58  0.4677  0.0073  0.0385  0.0373  0.0384  0.03
Garcia 2007b   66  0.4370  0.0079  0.0374  0.0349  0.0572  0.04
Gierzod 1998   53  0.4774  0.0053  0.0551  0.0570  0.0465  0.04
Gornostaeva 1994   56  0.4757  0.0057  0.0455  0.0478  0.0386  0.03
Groot 1988   26  0.5762  0.0028  0.0619  0.3831  0.3115  0.34
Harasiewicz 1955   18  0.6121  0.0130  0.0638  0.1771  0.0351  0.07
Hatto 1993   39  0.5332  0.0040  0.0734  0.1961  0.0447  0.09
Hatto 1997   34  0.5569  0.0039  0.0532  0.2172  0.0444  0.09
Horowitz 1949   40  0.5239  0.0052  0.0453  0.0438  0.1849  0.08
Indjic 1988   37  0.5434  0.0024  0.0530  0.2258  0.0540  0.10
Kapell 1951   72  0.4180  0.0051  0.0648  0.0667  0.0455  0.05
Kissin 1993   36  0.5543  0.0022  0.0529  0.2554  0.0537  0.11
Kushner 1989   30  0.5648  0.0034  0.0528  0.2662  0.0536  0.11
Luisada 1991   2  0.6949  0.008  0.135  0.5724  0.415  0.48
Lushtak 2004   4  0.6740  0.0020  0.1117  0.4254  0.0529  0.14
Malcuzynski 1961   79  0.3765  0.0075  0.0376  0.0366  0.0477  0.03
Magaloff 1978   41  0.5275  0.0041  0.0636  0.1846  0.0831  0.12
Magin 1975   55  0.4745  0.0043  0.0739  0.1747  0.0543  0.09
Michalowski 1933   82  0.3466  0.0078  0.0380  0.0370  0.0480  0.03
Milkina 1970   38  0.5324  0.0117  0.1120  0.3734  0.1920  0.27
Mohovich 1999   15  0.627  0.0319  0.1218  0.4239  0.1522  0.25
Moravec 1969   60  0.4528  0.0046  0.0746  0.0734  0.2430  0.13
Morozova 2008   9  0.6513  0.0111  0.1110  0.4925  0.2413  0.34
Neighaus 1950   19  0.598  0.0312  0.1014  0.4761  0.0528  0.15
Niedzielski 1931   77  0.3937  0.0056  0.0457  0.0464  0.0376  0.03
Ohlsson 1999   27  0.565  0.069  0.1213  0.4729  0.2612  0.35
Osinska 1989   33  0.5542  0.0044  0.0643  0.1278  0.0352  0.06
Pachmann 1927   23  0.5841  0.0027  0.0424  0.305  0.538  0.40
Paderewski 1930   65  0.4359  0.0067  0.0460  0.0476  0.0379  0.03
Perlemuter 1992   14  0.6255  0.0032  0.0542  0.1352  0.0548  0.08
Pierdomenico 2008   52  0.4851  0.0048  0.0550  0.0534  0.2334  0.11
Poblocka 1999   73  0.4152  0.0055  0.0552  0.0561  0.0553  0.05
Rabcewiczowa 1932   43  0.5117  0.0149  0.0649  0.0651  0.0454  0.05
Rachmaninoff 1923   32  0.5546  0.0037  0.0527  0.2752  0.0532  0.12
Rangell 2001   78  0.3727  0.0036  0.0540  0.1617  0.3823  0.25
Richter 1976   81  0.3644  0.0066  0.0462  0.0452  0.0656  0.05
Rosen 1989   25  0.589  0.0316  0.1116  0.4527  0.2614  0.34
Rosenthal 1930   86  0.2385  0.0087  0.0465  0.0480  0.0285  0.03
Rosenthal 1931   85  0.2783  0.0085  0.0458  0.0457  0.0462  0.04
Rosenthal 1931b   84  0.2887  0.0077  0.0383  0.0348  0.0571  0.04
Rosenthal 1931c   87  0.2163  0.0086  0.0381  0.0381  0.0388  0.03
Rosenthal 1931d   83  0.2984  0.0076  0.0387  0.0369  0.0487  0.03
Rossi 2007   49  0.4876  0.0081  0.0384  0.0366  0.0475  0.03
Rubinstein 1939   63  0.4533  0.0061  0.0463  0.0430  0.2835  0.11
Rubinstein 1952   48  0.4988  0.0038  0.0535  0.1923  0.3821  0.27
Rubinstein 1966   24  0.5854  0.0023  0.0526  0.2721  0.4116  0.33
Schilhawsky 1960   64  0.4461  0.0059  0.0367  0.0349  0.0663  0.04
Shebanova 2002   10  0.6415  0.016  0.096  0.5517  0.426  0.48
Smith 1975   29  0.5671  0.0035  0.0631  0.2250  0.0539  0.10
Sokolov 2002   67  0.4282  0.0063  0.0369  0.0374  0.0374  0.03
Sztompka 1959   61  0.4568  0.0080  0.0368  0.0361  0.0560  0.04
Tomsic 1995   51  0.4889  0.0062  0.0461  0.0473  0.0378  0.03
Uninsky 1932   45  0.5050  0.0065  0.0466  0.0447  0.0758  0.05
Uninsky 1971   69  0.4222  0.0172  0.0370  0.0367  0.0561  0.04
Wasowski 1980   35  0.553  0.114  0.1421  0.3324  0.2319  0.28
Zak 1937   3  0.682  0.132  0.243  0.6115  0.453  0.52
Zak 1951   7  0.6647  0.003  0.174  0.6119  0.347  0.46
Random 1   90  -0.1290  0.0090  0.0190  0.0162  0.0490  0.02
Random 2   89  -0.0681  0.0089  0.0288  0.0219  0.2250  0.07
Random 3   88  -0.0379  0.0088  0.0289  0.0212  0.4146  0.09

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).