Farrell 1958

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   46  0.3110  0.0122  0.0738  0.1644  0.1332  0.14
Anderszewski 2003   56  0.2968  0.0056  0.0562  0.0563  0.0466  0.04
Ashkenazy 1981   65  0.2539  0.0075  0.0281  0.0287  0.0390  0.02
Bacha 2000   71  0.2554  0.0068  0.0468  0.0463  0.0464  0.04
Badura 1965   61  0.2657  0.0063  0.0559  0.0561  0.0471  0.04
Barbosa 1983   16  0.3937  0.0015  0.0823  0.3735  0.2420  0.30
Biret 1990   5  0.4321  0.007  0.184  0.6510  0.642  0.64
Blet 2003   68  0.2583  0.0079  0.0470  0.0470  0.0467  0.04
Block 1995   80  0.2181  0.0077  0.0377  0.0387  0.0379  0.03
Blumental 1952   78  0.2382  0.0071  0.0374  0.0384  0.0380  0.03
Boshniakovich 1969   82  0.2188  0.0065  0.0561  0.0578  0.0472  0.04
Brailowsky 1960   47  0.3145  0.0054  0.0650  0.0657  0.0651  0.06
Bunin 1987   40  0.3375  0.0049  0.1045  0.1037  0.2033  0.14
Bunin 1987b   33  0.3424  0.0048  0.0656  0.0636  0.2436  0.12
Chiu 1999   19  0.3825  0.0034  0.0830  0.2672  0.0443  0.10
Cohen 1997   45  0.3161  0.0061  0.0649  0.0647  0.0849  0.07
Cortot 1951   20  0.3835  0.0029  0.0921  0.386  0.668  0.50
Csalog 1996   29  0.3656  0.0032  0.0829  0.2737  0.1529  0.20
Czerny 1949   2  0.502  0.162  0.422  0.775  0.811  0.79
Czerny 1990   9  0.4042  0.0018  0.0813  0.4838  0.2318  0.33
Duchoud 2007   8  0.4217  0.0011  0.149  0.556  0.654  0.60
Ezaki 2006   14  0.3915  0.0124  0.0725  0.3543  0.2421  0.29
Falvay 1989   11  0.405  0.0316  0.0916  0.4736  0.2317  0.33
Farrell 1958   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Ferenczy 1958   75  0.2386  0.0081  0.0283  0.0251  0.0770  0.04
Fliere 1977   44  0.3230  0.0031  0.0735  0.2059  0.0542  0.10
Fou 1978   17  0.3853  0.0017  0.0715  0.4842  0.1722  0.29
Francois 1956   42  0.3326  0.0021  0.0822  0.3818  0.5811  0.47
Friedman 1923   58  0.2816  0.0051  0.0748  0.0750  0.0750  0.07
Friedman 1923b   59  0.2848  0.0053  0.0654  0.0654  0.0657  0.06
Friedman 1930   77  0.2369  0.0070  0.0469  0.0476  0.0469  0.04
Garcia 2007   66  0.2549  0.0057  0.0658  0.0667  0.0561  0.05
Garcia 2007b   52  0.3023  0.0037  0.0640  0.1438  0.1534  0.14
Gierzod 1998   79  0.2290  0.0078  0.0373  0.0382  0.0378  0.03
Gornostaeva 1994   32  0.3451  0.0052  0.0651  0.0664  0.0462  0.05
Groot 1988   51  0.3080  0.0055  0.0847  0.0873  0.0458  0.06
Harasiewicz 1955   28  0.3643  0.0038  0.0531  0.2573  0.0540  0.11
Hatto 1993   53  0.2964  0.0062  0.0655  0.0679  0.0463  0.05
Hatto 1997   37  0.3465  0.0039  0.0632  0.2348  0.0638  0.12
Horowitz 1949   85  0.1838  0.0085  0.0287  0.0275  0.0387  0.02
Indjic 1988   64  0.2691  0.0067  0.0563  0.0576  0.0465  0.04
Kapell 1951   12  0.408  0.029  0.156  0.5925  0.3212  0.43
Kissin 1993   50  0.3041  0.0050  0.0652  0.0667  0.0655  0.06
Kushner 1989   30  0.3522  0.0014  0.0819  0.4239  0.1825  0.27
Luisada 1991   73  0.2467  0.0082  0.0286  0.0282  0.0384  0.02
Lushtak 2004   4  0.436  0.038  0.218  0.5714  0.556  0.56
Malcuzynski 1961   36  0.3458  0.0042  0.0636  0.1657  0.0544  0.09
Magaloff 1978   48  0.3178  0.0046  0.0564  0.0588  0.0274  0.03
Magin 1975   76  0.2363  0.0072  0.0372  0.0373  0.0476  0.03
Michalowski 1933   87  0.1573  0.0087  0.0289  0.0273  0.0477  0.03
Milkina 1970   18  0.3828  0.0012  0.1012  0.4933  0.3613  0.42
Mohovich 1999   72  0.2444  0.0066  0.0466  0.0478  0.0473  0.04
Moravec 1969   24  0.3831  0.0033  0.0834  0.2158  0.0541  0.10
Morozova 2008   10  0.4036  0.0030  0.0827  0.3255  0.0535  0.13
Neighaus 1950   27  0.3689  0.0044  0.0644  0.1353  0.0548  0.08
Niedzielski 1931   69  0.2576  0.0080  0.0375  0.0373  0.0475  0.03
Ohlsson 1999   25  0.3772  0.0040  0.0633  0.2143  0.1331  0.17
Osinska 1989   26  0.3712  0.0110  0.1511  0.5331  0.3114  0.41
Pachmann 1927   63  0.2650  0.0059  0.0565  0.0551  0.0754  0.06
Paderewski 1930   88  0.1259  0.0088  0.0282  0.0284  0.0388  0.02
Perlemuter 1992   86  0.1677  0.0086  0.0285  0.0283  0.0385  0.02
Pierdomenico 2008   57  0.2987  0.0058  0.0467  0.0437  0.1845  0.08
Poblocka 1999   22  0.3820  0.0023  0.0720  0.4038  0.2816  0.33
Rabcewiczowa 1932   23  0.3846  0.0020  0.0914  0.4824  0.4710  0.47
Rachmaninoff 1923   13  0.403  0.075  0.1410  0.5518  0.497  0.52
Rangell 2001   7  0.4218  0.006  0.157  0.577  0.635  0.60
Richter 1976   34  0.3447  0.0045  0.0546  0.0976  0.0453  0.06
Rosen 1989   31  0.3527  0.0041  0.0737  0.1657  0.0447  0.08
Rosenthal 1930   35  0.3419  0.0025  0.0743  0.1437  0.3030  0.20
Rosenthal 1931   67  0.2560  0.0073  0.0279  0.0243  0.1856  0.06
Rosenthal 1931b   83  0.2084  0.0083  0.0280  0.0263  0.0482  0.03
Rosenthal 1931c   70  0.2514  0.0174  0.0376  0.0364  0.0483  0.03
Rosenthal 1931d   84  0.1879  0.0084  0.0288  0.0275  0.0391  0.02
Rossi 2007   81  0.2111  0.0135  0.0639  0.1512  0.4824  0.27
Rubinstein 1939   3  0.444  0.043  0.293  0.676  0.603  0.63
Rubinstein 1952   43  0.327  0.0213  0.1118  0.4339  0.2715  0.34
Rubinstein 1966   6  0.439  0.024  0.175  0.6326  0.369  0.48
Schilhawsky 1960   74  0.2462  0.0069  0.0471  0.0474  0.0468  0.04
Shebanova 2002   55  0.2952  0.0064  0.0560  0.0567  0.0660  0.05
Smith 1975   49  0.3074  0.0060  0.0657  0.0649  0.0752  0.06
Sokolov 2002   60  0.2740  0.0076  0.0284  0.0271  0.0386  0.02
Sztompka 1959   21  0.3871  0.0026  0.0724  0.3743  0.2223  0.29
Tomsic 1995   62  0.2613  0.0136  0.0541  0.1445  0.1037  0.12
Uninsky 1932   54  0.2970  0.0047  0.0653  0.0655  0.0559  0.05
Uninsky 1971   41  0.3332  0.0043  0.0542  0.1465  0.0546  0.08
Wasowski 1980   15  0.3929  0.0019  0.0817  0.4440  0.1327  0.24
Zak 1937   38  0.3355  0.0027  0.0726  0.3331  0.2719  0.30
Zak 1951   39  0.3333  0.0028  0.0928  0.3130  0.2426  0.27
Average   1  0.531  0.471  0.471  0.8150  0.0628  0.22
Random 1   91  -0.0785  0.0090  0.0190  0.0151  0.0489  0.02
Random 2   89  0.1034  0.0089  0.0378  0.034  0.5139  0.12
Random 3   90  -0.0766  0.0091  0.0191  0.0145  0.1081  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).