Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   24  0.4722  0.0032  0.0831  0.2983  0.0339  0.09
Anderszewski 2003   78  0.2949  0.0052  0.0650  0.0673  0.0358  0.04
Ashkenazy 1981   61  0.3583  0.0051  0.0463  0.0482  0.0380  0.03
Bacha 2000   29  0.4459  0.0038  0.0738  0.2144  0.1424  0.17
Badura 1965   54  0.3725  0.0041  0.0739  0.2153  0.0635  0.11
Barbosa 1983   42  0.4037  0.0027  0.1027  0.3542  0.1419  0.22
Biret 1990   9  0.5318  0.0111  0.1014  0.5144  0.1214  0.25
Blet 2003   23  0.4719  0.0131  0.0729  0.3244  0.1022  0.18
Block 1995   60  0.3523  0.0064  0.0469  0.0488  0.0278  0.03
Blumental 1952   77  0.2977  0.0066  0.0382  0.0385  0.0379  0.03
Boshniakovich 1969   50  0.3826  0.0060  0.0558  0.0569  0.0463  0.04
Brailowsky 1960   44  0.4052  0.0056  0.0556  0.0564  0.0548  0.05
Bunin 1987   73  0.3182  0.0079  0.0561  0.0584  0.0364  0.04
Bunin 1987b   75  0.3170  0.0078  0.0383  0.0384  0.0369  0.03
Chiu 1999   40  0.4120  0.0018  0.0720  0.4735  0.278  0.36
Cohen 1997   36  0.4128  0.0020  0.0822  0.445  0.544  0.49
Cortot 1951   72  0.3244  0.0075  0.0388  0.0382  0.0383  0.03
Csalog 1996   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Czerny 1949   69  0.3290  0.0076  0.0384  0.0388  0.0286  0.02
Czerny 1990   30  0.4342  0.0036  0.0834  0.2559  0.0536  0.11
Duchoud 2007   39  0.4151  0.0047  0.0649  0.0645  0.1142  0.08
Ezaki 2006   38  0.4178  0.0054  0.0554  0.0580  0.0354  0.04
Falvay 1989   2  0.592  0.102  0.273  0.6817  0.522  0.59
Farrell 1958   49  0.3853  0.0062  0.0557  0.0583  0.0357  0.04
Ferenczy 1958   21  0.4717  0.0129  0.0828  0.3226  0.2910  0.30
Fliere 1977   16  0.5016  0.0117  0.1012  0.5776  0.0427  0.15
Fou 1978   25  0.4715  0.0116  0.0819  0.4854  0.0528  0.15
Francois 1956   46  0.3981  0.0048  0.0560  0.0559  0.0466  0.04
Friedman 1923   88  0.1085  0.0088  0.0376  0.0388  0.0290  0.02
Friedman 1923b   87  0.1030  0.0087  0.0380  0.0388  0.0288  0.02
Friedman 1930   86  0.1531  0.0086  0.0470  0.0487  0.0376  0.03
Garcia 2007   80  0.2843  0.0065  0.0381  0.0359  0.0562  0.04
Garcia 2007b   83  0.2286  0.0068  0.0377  0.0369  0.0485  0.03
Gierzod 1998   26  0.4589  0.0037  0.0930  0.2983  0.0340  0.09
Gornostaeva 1994   31  0.4332  0.0057  0.0746  0.0778  0.0265  0.04
Groot 1988   15  0.5033  0.0025  0.0826  0.3641  0.1617  0.24
Harasiewicz 1955   74  0.3173  0.0055  0.0651  0.0671  0.0453  0.05
Hatto 1993   70  0.3279  0.0035  0.0837  0.2257  0.0637  0.11
Hatto 1997   58  0.3565  0.0033  0.0636  0.2363  0.0438  0.10
Horowitz 1949   67  0.3340  0.0074  0.0374  0.0376  0.0371  0.03
Indjic 1988   64  0.3468  0.0034  0.1033  0.2651  0.0634  0.12
Kapell 1951   5  0.553  0.087  0.169  0.6263  0.0425  0.16
Kissin 1993   20  0.498  0.0412  0.0910  0.5944  0.1113  0.25
Kushner 1989   19  0.4945  0.0028  0.1018  0.4860  0.0529  0.15
Luisada 1991   59  0.3524  0.0030  0.0735  0.2354  0.0633  0.12
Lushtak 2004   28  0.4454  0.0019  0.0924  0.4157  0.0531  0.14
Malcuzynski 1961   47  0.3963  0.0072  0.0466  0.0477  0.0370  0.03
Magaloff 1978   34  0.4258  0.0053  0.0553  0.0586  0.0356  0.04
Magin 1975   63  0.3446  0.0043  0.0645  0.1156  0.0444  0.07
Michalowski 1933   84  0.2148  0.0077  0.0386  0.0377  0.0474  0.03
Milkina 1970   11  0.5260  0.0013  0.1113  0.5263  0.0526  0.16
Mohovich 1999   18  0.5047  0.0026  0.1021  0.4548  0.0723  0.18
Moravec 1969   13  0.5129  0.0023  0.0825  0.4038  0.1712  0.26
Morozova 2008   68  0.3291  0.0050  0.0555  0.0575  0.0460  0.04
Neighaus 1950   56  0.3664  0.0067  0.0471  0.0488  0.0282  0.03
Niedzielski 1931   43  0.4027  0.0046  0.0747  0.0764  0.0351  0.05
Ohlsson 1999   27  0.4511  0.0114  0.0916  0.4944  0.1118  0.23
Osinska 1989   6  0.5414  0.018  0.208  0.6367  0.0521  0.18
Pachmann 1927   32  0.4238  0.0044  0.0540  0.1420  0.4016  0.24
Paderewski 1930   62  0.3455  0.0071  0.0472  0.0478  0.0372  0.03
Perlemuter 1992   51  0.3834  0.0045  0.0741  0.1462  0.0443  0.07
Pierdomenico 2008   55  0.3666  0.0061  0.0652  0.0665  0.0450  0.05
Poblocka 1999   4  0.577  0.044  0.162  0.7324  0.373  0.52
Rabcewiczowa 1932   48  0.3869  0.0058  0.0748  0.0782  0.0352  0.05
Rachmaninoff 1923   82  0.2576  0.0081  0.0375  0.0368  0.0467  0.03
Rangell 2001   33  0.4287  0.0042  0.0544  0.1466  0.0447  0.07
Richter 1976   41  0.4021  0.0039  0.0643  0.1455  0.0541  0.08
Rosen 1989   17  0.509  0.0324  0.0823  0.4167  0.0432  0.13
Rosenthal 1930   65  0.3374  0.0083  0.0467  0.0482  0.0377  0.03
Rosenthal 1931   81  0.2788  0.0085  0.0464  0.0477  0.0375  0.03
Rosenthal 1931b   79  0.2872  0.0084  0.0373  0.0386  0.0289  0.02
Rosenthal 1931c   52  0.3880  0.0070  0.0385  0.0380  0.0384  0.03
Rosenthal 1931d   71  0.3256  0.0082  0.0468  0.0480  0.0381  0.03
Rossi 2007   85  0.2050  0.0080  0.0379  0.0357  0.0555  0.04
Rubinstein 1939   37  0.4135  0.0015  0.0932  0.2823  0.329  0.30
Rubinstein 1952   1  0.611  0.351  0.344  0.6712  0.591  0.63
Rubinstein 1966   8  0.5339  0.006  0.1511  0.5830  0.345  0.44
Schilhawsky 1960   53  0.3771  0.0059  0.0559  0.0577  0.0459  0.04
Shebanova 2002   7  0.544  0.083  0.187  0.6333  0.276  0.41
Smith 1975   57  0.3557  0.0063  0.0465  0.0479  0.0368  0.03
Sokolov 2002   35  0.4210  0.0249  0.0562  0.0560  0.0549  0.05
Sztompka 1959   66  0.3384  0.0073  0.0387  0.0385  0.0373  0.03
Tomsic 1995   12  0.5161  0.0021  0.1017  0.4939  0.1711  0.29
Uninsky 1932   76  0.3141  0.0069  0.0378  0.0367  0.0561  0.04
Uninsky 1971   45  0.396  0.0540  0.0642  0.1473  0.0445  0.07
Wasowski 1980   22  0.4713  0.0122  0.0715  0.5043  0.1215  0.24
Zak 1937   10  0.5336  0.009  0.135  0.6438  0.217  0.37
Zak 1951   14  0.5112  0.0110  0.146  0.6447  0.0720  0.21
Average   3  0.575  0.075  0.191  0.7484  0.0330  0.15
Random 1   90  -0.0562  0.0089  0.0289  0.0229  0.2246  0.07
Random 2   91  -0.0967  0.0091  0.0191  0.0184  0.0291  0.01
Random 3   89  -0.0375  0.0090  0.0190  0.0172  0.0387  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).