Moravec 1969

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   10  0.6112  0.0219  0.0726  0.3459  0.0430  0.12
Anderszewski 2003   69  0.4139  0.0060  0.0381  0.0373  0.0373  0.03
Ashkenazy 1981   54  0.4825  0.0031  0.0636  0.2469  0.0345  0.08
Bacha 2000   32  0.5550  0.0016  0.0723  0.3644  0.1420  0.22
Badura 1965   72  0.409  0.0251  0.0366  0.0377  0.0377  0.03
Barbosa 1983   57  0.4555  0.0055  0.0371  0.0369  0.0472  0.03
Biret 1990   9  0.6220  0.005  0.128  0.4944  0.1218  0.24
Blet 2003   40  0.5370  0.0057  0.0375  0.0379  0.0374  0.03
Block 1995   71  0.4082  0.0076  0.0364  0.0388  0.0290  0.02
Blumental 1952   22  0.582  0.182  0.263  0.621  0.503  0.56
Boshniakovich 1969   75  0.3790  0.0085  0.0379  0.0375  0.0378  0.03
Brailowsky 1960   41  0.5372  0.0039  0.0643  0.1865  0.0439  0.08
Bunin 1987   83  0.3049  0.0088  0.0461  0.0485  0.0280  0.03
Bunin 1987b   84  0.2969  0.0087  0.0287  0.0285  0.0287  0.02
Chiu 1999   58  0.4554  0.0035  0.0635  0.2447  0.0726  0.13
Cohen 1997   77  0.3519  0.0071  0.0365  0.0352  0.0558  0.04
Cortot 1951   11  0.6176  0.0018  0.0817  0.4027  0.2912  0.34
Csalog 1996   12  0.6158  0.0013  0.0919  0.399  0.496  0.44
Czerny 1949   15  0.6010  0.0214  0.0712  0.4639  0.1616  0.27
Czerny 1990   1  0.731  0.381  0.371  0.7214  0.472  0.58
Duchoud 2007   56  0.4738  0.0069  0.0463  0.0470  0.0457  0.04
Ezaki 2006   24  0.5715  0.0126  0.0720  0.3958  0.0429  0.12
Falvay 1989   4  0.673  0.054  0.169  0.4915  0.474  0.48
Farrell 1958   30  0.5640  0.0038  0.0733  0.2661  0.0532  0.11
Ferenczy 1958   47  0.5116  0.0121  0.0745  0.1453  0.0542  0.08
Fliere 1977   39  0.5375  0.0049  0.0462  0.0476  0.0362  0.03
Fou 1978   53  0.4874  0.0054  0.0367  0.0378  0.0467  0.03
Francois 1956   7  0.657  0.037  0.1315  0.4133  0.2314  0.31
Friedman 1923   88  0.2087  0.0083  0.0370  0.0356  0.0661  0.04
Friedman 1923b   87  0.2171  0.0082  0.0369  0.0355  0.0659  0.04
Friedman 1930   80  0.3228  0.0075  0.0453  0.0465  0.0556  0.04
Garcia 2007   74  0.3878  0.0077  0.0368  0.0366  0.0476  0.03
Garcia 2007b   86  0.2286  0.0081  0.0451  0.0484  0.0286  0.03
Gierzod 1998   16  0.5979  0.0029  0.0731  0.3264  0.0434  0.11
Gornostaeva 1994   37  0.5432  0.0061  0.0384  0.0376  0.0381  0.03
Groot 1988   36  0.5465  0.0053  0.0376  0.0377  0.0383  0.03
Harasiewicz 1955   70  0.4042  0.0062  0.0377  0.0367  0.0385  0.03
Hatto 1993   85  0.2941  0.0079  0.0458  0.0480  0.0384  0.03
Hatto 1997   79  0.3348  0.0078  0.0373  0.0382  0.0375  0.03
Horowitz 1949   52  0.4836  0.0065  0.0374  0.0383  0.0369  0.03
Indjic 1988   82  0.3253  0.0080  0.0549  0.0585  0.0353  0.04
Kapell 1951   8  0.648  0.0211  0.097  0.5053  0.0523  0.16
Kissin 1993   25  0.5773  0.0036  0.0627  0.3449  0.0625  0.14
Kushner 1989   14  0.6159  0.0032  0.0628  0.3365  0.0433  0.11
Luisada 1991   55  0.4747  0.0030  0.0639  0.2261  0.0437  0.09
Lushtak 2004   64  0.4364  0.0058  0.0383  0.0388  0.0289  0.02
Malcuzynski 1961   18  0.596  0.0315  0.0924  0.3535  0.1519  0.23
Magaloff 1978   23  0.5833  0.0037  0.0722  0.3656  0.0527  0.13
Magin 1975   67  0.4277  0.0056  0.0452  0.0483  0.0366  0.03
Michalowski 1933   78  0.3417  0.0173  0.0455  0.0463  0.0551  0.04
Milkina 1970   5  0.6721  0.006  0.135  0.5543  0.0921  0.22
Mohovich 1999   29  0.5634  0.0045  0.1041  0.2082  0.0344  0.08
Moravec 1969   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Morozova 2008   65  0.4381  0.0033  0.0737  0.2376  0.0341  0.08
Neighaus 1950   63  0.4383  0.0074  0.0550  0.0583  0.0360  0.04
Niedzielski 1931   3  0.675  0.043  0.272  0.631  0.611  0.62
Ohlsson 1999   61  0.4545  0.0070  0.0460  0.0480  0.0371  0.03
Osinska 1989   6  0.6668  0.0010  0.0810  0.4754  0.0524  0.15
Pachmann 1927   76  0.3560  0.0084  0.0288  0.0274  0.0470  0.03
Paderewski 1930   34  0.5544  0.0044  0.0842  0.2069  0.0340  0.08
Perlemuter 1992   49  0.5066  0.0063  0.0378  0.0383  0.0363  0.03
Pierdomenico 2008   66  0.4262  0.0059  0.0385  0.0362  0.0465  0.03
Poblocka 1999   38  0.5384  0.0048  0.0747  0.0781  0.0349  0.05
Rabcewiczowa 1932   13  0.6129  0.0012  0.1311  0.4633  0.2213  0.32
Rachmaninoff 1923   28  0.564  0.059  0.146  0.5333  0.1715  0.30
Rangell 2001   62  0.4446  0.0072  0.0456  0.0486  0.0382  0.03
Richter 1976   81  0.3251  0.0086  0.0286  0.0284  0.0288  0.02
Rosen 1989   35  0.5588  0.0042  0.0640  0.2186  0.0343  0.08
Rosenthal 1930   17  0.5918  0.0122  0.0614  0.4322  0.3310  0.38
Rosenthal 1931   43  0.5263  0.0024  0.0825  0.3420  0.429  0.38
Rosenthal 1931b   46  0.5161  0.0025  0.1030  0.3316  0.3911  0.36
Rosenthal 1931c   20  0.5926  0.0017  0.0813  0.4413  0.495  0.46
Rosenthal 1931d   27  0.5727  0.0023  0.0818  0.3913  0.467  0.42
Rossi 2007   73  0.3952  0.0043  0.0744  0.1713  0.3917  0.26
Rubinstein 1939   68  0.4130  0.0068  0.0380  0.0338  0.1846  0.07
Rubinstein 1952   21  0.5811  0.0220  0.0716  0.4025  0.388  0.39
Rubinstein 1966   48  0.5135  0.0050  0.0459  0.0479  0.0454  0.04
Schilhawsky 1960   51  0.4957  0.0064  0.0454  0.0476  0.0455  0.04
Shebanova 2002   26  0.5756  0.0027  0.0629  0.3383  0.0336  0.10
Smith 1975   31  0.5531  0.0028  0.0621  0.3774  0.0331  0.11
Sokolov 2002   60  0.4543  0.0067  0.0382  0.0385  0.0364  0.03
Sztompka 1959   45  0.5222  0.0046  0.0648  0.0670  0.0450  0.05
Tomsic 1995   50  0.4991  0.0066  0.0372  0.0369  0.0468  0.03
Uninsky 1932   44  0.5214  0.0147  0.0846  0.0869  0.0447  0.06
Uninsky 1971   59  0.4580  0.0052  0.0457  0.0479  0.0452  0.04
Wasowski 1980   19  0.5937  0.0034  0.0638  0.2233  0.1522  0.18
Zak 1937   33  0.5523  0.0040  0.0732  0.2778  0.0435  0.10
Zak 1951   42  0.5324  0.0041  0.0734  0.2678  0.0338  0.09
Average   2  0.6813  0.018  0.144  0.5777  0.0328  0.13
Random 1   91  -0.1889  0.0091  0.0191  0.0169  0.0391  0.02
Random 2   90  -0.0867  0.0089  0.0290  0.0234  0.1648  0.06
Random 3   89  -0.0385  0.0090  0.0289  0.0266  0.0479  0.03

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).