Fou 1978

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   25  0.4441  0.0034  0.0837  0.2712  0.5330  0.38
Anderszewski 2003   13  0.4815  0.0011  0.1212  0.616  0.707  0.65
Ashkenazy 1981   3  0.5411  0.007  0.136  0.674  0.724  0.69
Bacha 2000   45  0.3920  0.0025  0.0835  0.2714  0.5429  0.38
Badura 1965   29  0.4328  0.0023  0.0922  0.453  0.6918  0.56
Barbosa 1983   26  0.4345  0.0030  0.0832  0.3233  0.2636  0.29
Biret 1990   71  0.3231  0.0074  0.0378  0.0349  0.0685  0.04
Blet 2003   52  0.3853  0.0062  0.0555  0.0540  0.2259  0.10
Block 1995   21  0.4434  0.0019  0.1918  0.527  0.6514  0.58
Blumental 1952   15  0.475  0.029  0.1210  0.647  0.715  0.67
Boshniakovich 1969   31  0.424  0.0213  0.1119  0.5221  0.4722  0.49
Brailowsky 1960   33  0.4238  0.0031  0.0828  0.3511  0.6723  0.48
Bunin 1987   85  0.2673  0.0087  0.0374  0.0382  0.0388  0.03
Bunin 1987b   84  0.2688  0.0086  0.0288  0.0281  0.0389  0.02
Chiu 1999   22  0.4461  0.0038  0.0739  0.2425  0.2739  0.25
Cohen 1997   75  0.3166  0.0082  0.0472  0.0453  0.0675  0.05
Cortot 1951   78  0.2971  0.0072  0.0383  0.0327  0.3460  0.10
Csalog 1996   62  0.3533  0.0054  0.0461  0.0425  0.2758  0.10
Czerny 1949   60  0.3662  0.0064  0.0462  0.0434  0.4351  0.13
Czerny 1990   5  0.526  0.014  0.153  0.7410  0.752  0.74
Duchoud 2007   77  0.3060  0.0083  0.0380  0.0353  0.0684  0.04
Ezaki 2006   17  0.4740  0.0028  0.1021  0.4818  0.5621  0.52
Falvay 1989   8  0.502  0.056  0.1215  0.557  0.5220  0.53
Farrell 1958   51  0.3867  0.0042  0.0642  0.1715  0.4835  0.29
Ferenczy 1958   57  0.3736  0.0053  0.0464  0.0411  0.7144  0.17
Fliere 1977   2  0.578  0.012  0.242  0.807  0.701  0.75
Fou 1978   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Francois 1956   79  0.2935  0.0075  0.0376  0.0343  0.1371  0.06
Friedman 1923   59  0.3648  0.0051  0.0559  0.0522  0.4947  0.16
Friedman 1923b   58  0.3683  0.0050  0.0558  0.0526  0.4648  0.15
Friedman 1930   81  0.2952  0.0077  0.0287  0.0259  0.0587  0.03
Garcia 2007   74  0.3143  0.0071  0.0463  0.0443  0.1068  0.06
Garcia 2007b   72  0.3274  0.0070  0.0375  0.0340  0.1472  0.06
Gierzod 1998   10  0.499  0.0110  0.117  0.669  0.639  0.64
Gornostaeva 1994   46  0.3955  0.0061  0.0556  0.0547  0.0870  0.06
Groot 1988   37  0.4189  0.0037  0.0738  0.2640  0.1541  0.20
Harasiewicz 1955   6  0.5224  0.005  0.155  0.698  0.5910  0.64
Hatto 1993   28  0.4382  0.0035  0.1134  0.3045  0.1242  0.19
Hatto 1997   43  0.4077  0.0046  0.0650  0.0663  0.0474  0.05
Horowitz 1949   83  0.2691  0.0080  0.0381  0.0346  0.0681  0.04
Indjic 1988   42  0.4070  0.0048  0.0552  0.0550  0.0767  0.06
Kapell 1951   18  0.4625  0.0016  0.129  0.6412  0.5015  0.57
Kissin 1993   11  0.4930  0.0014  0.1113  0.6012  0.6711  0.63
Kushner 1989   7  0.5151  0.0012  0.1511  0.6315  0.5313  0.58
Luisada 1991   35  0.4144  0.0043  0.0643  0.1236  0.2246  0.16
Lushtak 2004   39  0.4068  0.0020  0.1125  0.4218  0.5325  0.47
Malcuzynski 1961   34  0.4154  0.0039  0.0936  0.2749  0.0649  0.13
Magaloff 1978   48  0.3818  0.0045  0.0645  0.1161  0.0464  0.07
Magin 1975   54  0.3816  0.0056  0.0647  0.0654  0.0573  0.05
Michalowski 1933   87  0.2272  0.0085  0.0384  0.0356  0.0682  0.04
Milkina 1970   23  0.4423  0.0029  0.1127  0.3728  0.4427  0.40
Mohovich 1999   32  0.4247  0.0036  0.0730  0.3328  0.4231  0.37
Moravec 1969   27  0.4319  0.0022  0.0933  0.3129  0.3232  0.31
Morozova 2008   12  0.497  0.018  0.178  0.655  0.638  0.64
Neighaus 1950   65  0.3559  0.0059  0.0557  0.0545  0.1263  0.08
Niedzielski 1931   69  0.3232  0.0076  0.0286  0.0255  0.0586  0.03
Ohlsson 1999   38  0.4137  0.0044  0.0644  0.1241  0.1550  0.13
Osinska 1989   47  0.3986  0.0058  0.0746  0.0753  0.0566  0.06
Pachmann 1927   67  0.3327  0.0067  0.0467  0.0429  0.3652  0.12
Paderewski 1930   86  0.2469  0.0069  0.0468  0.0439  0.2856  0.11
Perlemuter 1992   64  0.3584  0.0065  0.0377  0.0332  0.2761  0.09
Pierdomenico 2008   70  0.3263  0.0081  0.0382  0.0352  0.0580  0.04
Poblocka 1999   14  0.4721  0.0015  0.1314  0.579  0.6212  0.59
Rabcewiczowa 1932   68  0.3385  0.0063  0.0554  0.0543  0.1362  0.08
Rachmaninoff 1923   53  0.3812  0.0040  0.0941  0.2124  0.3837  0.28
Rangell 2001   55  0.3839  0.0047  0.0648  0.0620  0.5243  0.18
Richter 1976   9  0.4917  0.0017  0.1416  0.5419  0.5916  0.56
Rosen 1989   19  0.4610  0.0127  0.0829  0.3329  0.2734  0.30
Rosenthal 1930   56  0.3764  0.0060  0.0560  0.0523  0.5645  0.17
Rosenthal 1931   61  0.3558  0.0057  0.0651  0.0613  0.6940  0.20
Rosenthal 1931b   76  0.3076  0.0078  0.0385  0.0326  0.4653  0.12
Rosenthal 1931c   73  0.3157  0.0079  0.0469  0.0447  0.0676  0.05
Rosenthal 1931d   82  0.2879  0.0073  0.0379  0.0320  0.4357  0.11
Rossi 2007   88  0.2065  0.0088  0.0471  0.0455  0.0579  0.04
Rubinstein 1939   30  0.4213  0.0021  0.1124  0.4314  0.5224  0.47
Rubinstein 1952   40  0.4026  0.0032  0.0826  0.3832  0.4028  0.39
Rubinstein 1966   4  0.533  0.043  0.394  0.7213  0.616  0.66
Schilhawsky 1960   80  0.2950  0.0084  0.0470  0.0463  0.0483  0.04
Shebanova 2002   24  0.4429  0.0033  0.0831  0.3338  0.2833  0.30
Smith 1975   63  0.3514  0.0068  0.0465  0.0445  0.1265  0.07
Sokolov 2002   66  0.3487  0.0066  0.0473  0.0451  0.0578  0.04
Sztompka 1959   16  0.4742  0.0026  0.0820  0.5015  0.5819  0.54
Tomsic 1995   50  0.3846  0.0055  0.0553  0.0530  0.2555  0.11
Uninsky 1932   20  0.4656  0.0018  0.1317  0.5212  0.6117  0.56
Uninsky 1971   36  0.4122  0.0024  0.0723  0.4421  0.4526  0.44
Wasowski 1980   49  0.3880  0.0052  0.0466  0.0461  0.0577  0.04
Zak 1937   41  0.4049  0.0041  0.0840  0.2124  0.3838  0.28
Zak 1951   44  0.3978  0.0049  0.0649  0.0632  0.2154  0.11
Average   1  0.661  0.741  0.731  0.9116  0.533  0.69
Random 1   89  -0.0175  0.0090  0.0290  0.0264  0.0391  0.02
Random 2   91  -0.0390  0.0091  0.0191  0.0178  0.0390  0.02
Random 3   90  -0.0181  0.0089  0.0289  0.0234  0.2069  0.06

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).