Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   16  0.4967  0.0033  0.0930  0.3167  0.0438  0.11
Anderszewski 2003   33  0.4518  0.0135  0.0735  0.2274  0.0340  0.08
Ashkenazy 1981   35  0.455  0.046  0.1211  0.5239  0.2210  0.34
Bacha 2000   60  0.3872  0.0058  0.0363  0.0360  0.0553  0.04
Badura 1965   83  0.3238  0.0070  0.0376  0.0374  0.0475  0.03
Barbosa 1983   71  0.3619  0.0069  0.0377  0.0356  0.0557  0.04
Biret 1990   46  0.4139  0.0055  0.0373  0.0384  0.0383  0.03
Blet 2003   34  0.4521  0.0047  0.0548  0.0549  0.0552  0.05
Block 1995   44  0.4263  0.0029  0.1031  0.3145  0.0922  0.17
Blumental 1952   61  0.3855  0.0028  0.1032  0.3035  0.1618  0.22
Boshniakovich 1969   19  0.4734  0.0042  0.0442  0.1263  0.0541  0.08
Brailowsky 1960   53  0.4071  0.0072  0.0382  0.0356  0.0554  0.04
Bunin 1987   78  0.3486  0.0084  0.0451  0.0478  0.0381  0.03
Bunin 1987b   77  0.3468  0.0083  0.0384  0.0378  0.0367  0.03
Chiu 1999   68  0.3748  0.0045  0.0444  0.0969  0.0448  0.06
Cohen 1997   88  0.1982  0.0088  0.0453  0.0482  0.0380  0.03
Cortot 1951   48  0.4176  0.0066  0.0456  0.0444  0.1245  0.07
Csalog 1996   52  0.4046  0.0059  0.0364  0.0347  0.0751  0.05
Czerny 1949   28  0.4689  0.0049  0.0547  0.0560  0.0458  0.04
Czerny 1990   4  0.5645  0.007  0.134  0.6144  0.1116  0.26
Duchoud 2007   66  0.3717  0.0168  0.0383  0.0378  0.0474  0.03
Ezaki 2006   51  0.4073  0.0079  0.0368  0.0382  0.0359  0.03
Falvay 1989   69  0.3762  0.0076  0.0386  0.0387  0.0362  0.03
Farrell 1958   29  0.4656  0.0050  0.0746  0.0758  0.0549  0.06
Ferenczy 1958   59  0.3887  0.0073  0.0370  0.0357  0.0472  0.03
Fliere 1977   3  0.5658  0.009  0.097  0.5669  0.0428  0.15
Fou 1978   79  0.3369  0.0077  0.0288  0.0286  0.0388  0.02
Francois 1956   21  0.4743  0.0048  0.0449  0.0470  0.0386  0.03
Friedman 1923   63  0.3827  0.0023  0.1033  0.2914  0.469  0.37
Friedman 1923b   54  0.397  0.0321  0.1025  0.3412  0.497  0.41
Friedman 1930   50  0.4079  0.0024  0.0928  0.3329  0.2913  0.31
Garcia 2007   55  0.399  0.0227  0.0926  0.3315  0.428  0.37
Garcia 2007b   86  0.3084  0.0054  0.0375  0.0374  0.0487  0.03
Gierzod 1998   6  0.534  0.103  0.205  0.6139  0.335  0.45
Gornostaeva 1994   25  0.4636  0.0061  0.0380  0.0379  0.0290  0.02
Groot 1988   36  0.4525  0.0046  0.0450  0.0486  0.0384  0.03
Harasiewicz 1955   56  0.3944  0.0041  0.0437  0.1677  0.0346  0.07
Hatto 1993   49  0.4130  0.0011  0.0815  0.4936  0.1515  0.27
Hatto 1997   64  0.3816  0.0134  0.0934  0.2445  0.0931  0.15
Horowitz 1949   22  0.476  0.0410  0.0817  0.4725  0.454  0.46
Indjic 1988   45  0.4220  0.0013  0.0916  0.4841  0.1317  0.25
Kapell 1951   10  0.5112  0.0120  0.1019  0.4579  0.0433  0.13
Kissin 1993   32  0.4640  0.0026  0.0923  0.3851  0.0630  0.15
Kushner 1989   27  0.4677  0.0044  0.0445  0.0873  0.0450  0.06
Luisada 1991   26  0.468  0.0225  0.0820  0.4253  0.0624  0.16
Lushtak 2004   76  0.3474  0.0078  0.0385  0.0383  0.0376  0.03
Malcuzynski 1961   8  0.5235  0.0030  0.1027  0.3363  0.0436  0.11
Magaloff 1978   30  0.4628  0.0038  0.0538  0.1563  0.0439  0.08
Magin 1975   20  0.4715  0.0116  0.0918  0.4750  0.0529  0.15
Michalowski 1933   65  0.3851  0.0056  0.0361  0.0358  0.0656  0.04
Milkina 1970   43  0.4290  0.0062  0.0374  0.0374  0.0466  0.03
Mohovich 1999   41  0.4259  0.0057  0.0359  0.0373  0.0379  0.03
Moravec 1969   2  0.572  0.122  0.262  0.715  0.641  0.67
Morozova 2008   73  0.3652  0.0074  0.0369  0.0387  0.0289  0.02
Neighaus 1950   17  0.4832  0.0022  0.1024  0.3776  0.0435  0.12
Niedzielski 1931   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Ohlsson 1999   13  0.5010  0.0112  0.0821  0.3959  0.0532  0.14
Osinska 1989   37  0.4361  0.0064  0.0365  0.0383  0.0460  0.03
Pachmann 1927   85  0.3133  0.0087  0.0381  0.0379  0.0470  0.03
Paderewski 1930   39  0.4375  0.0053  0.0366  0.0356  0.0469  0.03
Perlemuter 1992   58  0.3842  0.0037  0.0536  0.1678  0.0342  0.07
Pierdomenico 2008   84  0.3229  0.0082  0.0371  0.0364  0.0555  0.04
Poblocka 1999   18  0.4864  0.0031  0.0822  0.3968  0.0434  0.12
Rabcewiczowa 1932   62  0.3883  0.0067  0.0367  0.0384  0.0365  0.03
Rachmaninoff 1923   5  0.5314  0.015  0.203  0.6617  0.452  0.54
Rangell 2001   82  0.3280  0.0085  0.0372  0.0382  0.0382  0.03
Richter 1976   24  0.4631  0.0032  0.0829  0.3136  0.2614  0.28
Rosen 1989   47  0.4181  0.0060  0.0455  0.0488  0.0377  0.03
Rosenthal 1930   42  0.4265  0.0065  0.0362  0.0338  0.1644  0.07
Rosenthal 1931   75  0.3547  0.0063  0.0452  0.0435  0.2837  0.11
Rosenthal 1931b   72  0.3637  0.0036  0.0540  0.1225  0.3919  0.22
Rosenthal 1931c   38  0.4353  0.0040  0.0539  0.1326  0.3720  0.22
Rosenthal 1931d   70  0.3766  0.0039  0.0543  0.1028  0.2823  0.17
Rossi 2007   87  0.2923  0.0081  0.0379  0.0343  0.1347  0.06
Rubinstein 1939   80  0.3326  0.0075  0.0287  0.0256  0.0564  0.03
Rubinstein 1952   74  0.3550  0.0052  0.0358  0.0384  0.0485  0.03
Rubinstein 1966   67  0.3785  0.0080  0.0357  0.0375  0.0471  0.03
Schilhawsky 1960   9  0.523  0.104  0.206  0.6027  0.433  0.51
Shebanova 2002   12  0.5013  0.018  0.098  0.5535  0.2011  0.33
Smith 1975   57  0.3954  0.0071  0.0378  0.0388  0.0363  0.03
Sokolov 2002   40  0.4278  0.0051  0.0454  0.0471  0.0361  0.03
Sztompka 1959   14  0.5011  0.0118  0.0913  0.4966  0.0527  0.16
Tomsic 1995   81  0.3349  0.0086  0.0360  0.0373  0.0468  0.03
Uninsky 1932   11  0.5122  0.0019  0.1114  0.4939  0.2112  0.32
Uninsky 1971   31  0.4660  0.0043  0.0541  0.1278  0.0443  0.07
Wasowski 1980   7  0.5257  0.0015  0.1110  0.5423  0.316  0.41
Zak 1937   15  0.4924  0.0014  0.099  0.5454  0.0525  0.16
Zak 1951   23  0.4741  0.0017  0.0812  0.4963  0.0526  0.16
Average   1  0.621  0.341  0.341  0.7863  0.0521  0.20
Random 1   90  -0.0691  0.0090  0.0290  0.0250  0.0478  0.03
Random 2   89  -0.0370  0.0089  0.0289  0.0257  0.0473  0.03
Random 3   91  -0.0788  0.0091  0.0191  0.0188  0.0291  0.01

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).