Czerny 1949

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   49  0.7228  0.0050  0.0458  0.0428  0.2050  0.09
Ashkenazy 1981   25  0.8225  0.0033  0.0739  0.0714  0.3837  0.16
Beliavsky 2004   15  0.8541  0.0035  0.0833  0.0815  0.3933  0.18
BenOr 1989   20  0.8351  0.0020  0.1017  0.3921  0.3323  0.36
Biret 1990   58  0.6749  0.0055  0.0460  0.0438  0.0661  0.05
Blet 2003   43  0.7764  0.0028  0.0627  0.278  0.3428  0.30
Block 1995   52  0.7130  0.0047  0.0738  0.0726  0.2443  0.13
Brailowsky 1960   35  0.8039  0.0034  0.0554  0.0511  0.4638  0.15
Chiu 1999   47  0.7518  0.0026  0.0925  0.3221  0.3326  0.32
Clidat 1994   14  0.8552  0.0023  0.1021  0.369  0.4221  0.39
Cohen 1997   63  0.3957  0.0063  0.0644  0.0637  0.0658  0.06
Coop 1987   37  0.7954  0.0010  0.1219  0.3922  0.3125  0.35
Cortot 1951   57  0.6855  0.0059  0.0461  0.0447  0.0564  0.04
Czerny 1949   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Czerny 1949b   1  0.971  0.921  0.911  0.961  0.961  0.96
Ezaki 2006   19  0.8422  0.006  0.166  0.5614  0.482  0.52
Falvay 1989   41  0.7863  0.0018  0.0918  0.3918  0.3920  0.39
Ferenczy 1958   61  0.6461  0.0043  0.0641  0.0619  0.3241  0.14
Fiorentino 1962   13  0.8526  0.0019  0.1015  0.4612  0.4613  0.46
Fliere 1977   4  0.8812  0.009  0.133  0.6111  0.443  0.52
Fou 1978   22  0.8356  0.0029  0.0926  0.3117  0.3924  0.35
Francois 1956   27  0.8147  0.0051  0.0459  0.0422  0.2449  0.10
Hatto 1997   55  0.7023  0.0044  0.0735  0.0718  0.3140  0.15
Horowitz 1971   50  0.7245  0.0052  0.0553  0.0532  0.1257  0.08
Horowitz 1985   60  0.6448  0.0061  0.0463  0.0430  0.1655  0.08
Indjic 2001   56  0.7016  0.0045  0.0736  0.0718  0.3042  0.14
Kapell 1951   23  0.8224  0.0011  0.1713  0.4716  0.4512  0.46
Kiepura 1999   30  0.815  0.0136  0.0734  0.0724  0.3635  0.16
Kilenyi 1937   16  0.8510  0.004  0.195  0.5616  0.457  0.50
Kissin 1993   34  0.804  0.013  0.209  0.4911  0.4016  0.44
Kitain 1937   62  0.548  0.0062  0.0555  0.0527  0.2248  0.10
Kushner 1990   32  0.8162  0.0031  0.0829  0.1921  0.1932  0.19
Levy 1951   48  0.7329  0.0054  0.0643  0.0614  0.4336  0.16
Luisada 1990   9  0.8646  0.0021  0.1016  0.4210  0.4517  0.43
Lushtak 2004   33  0.8040  0.0039  0.0642  0.0629  0.1451  0.09
Lympany 1968   39  0.7820  0.0040  0.0549  0.0525  0.2346  0.11
Magaloff 1977   29  0.8158  0.0037  0.0546  0.0520  0.2844  0.12
Magaloff 1977b   31  0.8142  0.0038  0.0645  0.0622  0.2445  0.12
Magin 1975   21  0.832  0.0112  0.1612  0.4814  0.555  0.51
Milkina 1970   38  0.7953  0.0048  0.0548  0.0549  0.0559  0.05
Mohovich 1999   5  0.8719  0.0013  0.1022  0.359  0.4719  0.41
Nadelmann 1956   42  0.787  0.0032  0.0832  0.148  0.4231  0.24
Ohlsson 1999   53  0.7050  0.0042  0.0737  0.0720  0.3339  0.15
Olejniczac 1990   12  0.8660  0.0015  0.098  0.4910  0.499  0.49
Olejniczak 1991   18  0.8436  0.0016  0.1214  0.4615  0.4515  0.45
Osinska 1989   10  0.8613  0.0017  0.084  0.5714  0.3614  0.45
Paderewski 1912   6  0.879  0.0014  0.1220  0.372  0.6111  0.48
Perahia 1994   59  0.6537  0.0060  0.0462  0.0427  0.2152  0.09
Perlemuter 1986   2  0.9138  0.005  0.1910  0.497  0.4810  0.48
Poblocka 1999   11  0.866  0.017  0.1411  0.4917  0.508  0.49
Rangell 2001   28  0.8117  0.0025  0.0724  0.3321  0.4222  0.37
Risler 1920   24  0.8235  0.0027  0.0731  0.164  0.5827  0.30
Rosen 1989   44  0.7634  0.0053  0.0547  0.0548  0.0560  0.05
Rubinstein 1939   54  0.7015  0.0058  0.0556  0.0530  0.1456  0.08
Rubinstein 1952   36  0.7933  0.0046  0.0640  0.0632  0.1353  0.09
Rubinstein 1966   51  0.7127  0.0056  0.0457  0.0438  0.0562  0.04
Rummel 1943   26  0.8121  0.0049  0.0551  0.053  0.5734  0.17
Shebanova 2002   40  0.7831  0.0041  0.0552  0.0528  0.2047  0.10
Smith 1975   8  0.8643  0.0022  0.0923  0.3512  0.4818  0.41
Szpilman 1948   7  0.8732  0.008  0.137  0.506  0.544  0.52
Uninsky 1971   17  0.853  0.0124  0.1030  0.1912  0.3230  0.25
Wasowski 1980   45  0.7514  0.0057  0.0550  0.0531  0.1254  0.08
Weissenberg 1971   46  0.7544  0.0030  0.1028  0.2416  0.3129  0.27
Average   3  0.8911  0.002  0.242  0.6921  0.376  0.51
Random 1    65  -0.1465  0.0065  0.0265  0.0253  0.0365  0.02
Random 2   64  -0.0266  0.0064  0.0464  0.0449  0.0463  0.04
Random 3   66  -0.1759  0.0066  0.0166  0.0147  0.0466  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).