Czerny 1949

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   42  0.3242  0.0047  0.0643  0.0621  0.2734  0.13
Ashkenazy 1981   59  0.2437  0.0060  0.0557  0.0557  0.0555  0.05
Beliavsky 2004   54  0.2828  0.0053  0.0552  0.0525  0.1935  0.10
BenOr 1989   32  0.3857  0.0030  0.0829  0.2131  0.1931  0.20
Biret 1990   44  0.3155  0.0042  0.0742  0.0749  0.0546  0.06
Blet 2003   57  0.2445  0.0041  0.0550  0.0546  0.0654  0.05
Block 1995   23  0.4251  0.0019  0.1220  0.3511  0.4818  0.41
Brailowsky 1960   10  0.504  0.0114  0.2211  0.5916  0.5811  0.58
Chiu 1999   34  0.3719  0.0034  0.0938  0.0917  0.4132  0.19
Clidat 1994   26  0.4230  0.0027  0.0927  0.2420  0.3325  0.28
Cohen 1997   63  0.1264  0.0062  0.0363  0.0356  0.0365  0.03
Coop 1987   49  0.3023  0.0055  0.0549  0.0545  0.0651  0.05
Cortot 1951   9  0.5212  0.0017  0.1717  0.411  0.8410  0.59
Czerny 1949   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Czerny 1949b   1  0.841  0.921  0.911  0.971  0.971  0.97
Ezaki 2006   11  0.5027  0.0010  0.155  0.7110  0.647  0.67
Falvay 1989   47  0.3165  0.0038  0.1133  0.1143  0.0640  0.08
Ferenczy 1958   41  0.3229  0.0035  0.0937  0.0933  0.1237  0.10
Fiorentino 1962   28  0.4043  0.0028  0.0925  0.2715  0.4921  0.36
Fliere 1977   45  0.3122  0.0044  0.0839  0.0842  0.0544  0.06
Fou 1978   7  0.5244  0.008  0.136  0.716  0.693  0.70
Francois 1956   55  0.2852  0.0056  0.0554  0.0557  0.0463  0.04
Hatto 1997   56  0.249  0.0059  0.0556  0.0563  0.0358  0.04
Horowitz 1971   8  0.5246  0.0015  0.2216  0.4710  0.5316  0.50
Horowitz 1985   16  0.463  0.0113  0.1912  0.583  0.669  0.62
Indjic 2001   60  0.2224  0.0061  0.0558  0.0555  0.0460  0.04
Kapell 1951   53  0.2838  0.0049  0.0547  0.0553  0.0550  0.05
Kiepura 1999   4  0.5715  0.006  0.137  0.703  0.684  0.69
Kilenyi 1937   35  0.3620  0.0029  0.1028  0.2325  0.2927  0.26
Kissin 1993   12  0.497  0.004  0.1714  0.5410  0.6312  0.58
Kitain 1937   31  0.3947  0.0040  0.0644  0.0618  0.4233  0.16
Kushner 1990   51  0.2962  0.0050  0.0840  0.0863  0.0352  0.05
Levy 1951   30  0.3913  0.0021  0.1119  0.398  0.5517  0.46
Luisada 1990   14  0.4825  0.0016  0.1715  0.507  0.6314  0.56
Lushtak 2004   20  0.4448  0.0020  0.1222  0.2921  0.2826  0.28
Lympany 1968   37  0.3541  0.0045  0.0461  0.0445  0.0556  0.04
Magaloff 1977   40  0.3363  0.0052  0.0548  0.0545  0.0459  0.04
Magaloff 1977b   52  0.2858  0.0058  0.0551  0.0560  0.0461  0.04
Magin 1975   6  0.535  0.013  0.234  0.7310  0.646  0.68
Milkina 1970   46  0.3159  0.0036  0.1136  0.1159  0.0443  0.07
Mohovich 1999   62  0.1333  0.0063  0.0462  0.0464  0.0364  0.03
Nadelmann 1956   19  0.4460  0.0022  0.1026  0.2628  0.1730  0.21
Ohlsson 1999   58  0.2432  0.0051  0.0559  0.0557  0.0457  0.04
Olejniczac 1990   27  0.4150  0.0026  0.0823  0.2918  0.5020  0.38
Olejniczak 1991   38  0.3456  0.0039  0.1135  0.1145  0.0838  0.09
Osinska 1989   13  0.4811  0.0012  0.189  0.6215  0.5113  0.56
Paderewski 1912   29  0.4017  0.0032  0.0732  0.1315  0.3629  0.22
Perahia 1994   24  0.4249  0.0037  0.1134  0.1136  0.0839  0.09
Perlemuter 1986   39  0.3353  0.0046  0.0555  0.0547  0.0553  0.05
Poblocka 1999   3  0.588  0.005  0.213  0.772  0.742  0.75
Rangell 2001   43  0.3139  0.0054  0.0553  0.0554  0.0462  0.04
Risler 1920   50  0.2954  0.0048  0.0645  0.0645  0.0548  0.05
Rosen 1989   21  0.436  0.009  0.1510  0.618  0.658  0.63
Rubinstein 1939   18  0.442  0.0118  0.1718  0.3919  0.2822  0.33
Rubinstein 1952   36  0.3618  0.0033  0.0741  0.0735  0.0647  0.06
Rubinstein 1966   33  0.3836  0.0031  0.0731  0.1645  0.0636  0.10
Rummel 1943   22  0.4314  0.0025  0.0930  0.2118  0.2828  0.24
Shebanova 2002   15  0.4716  0.0011  0.1613  0.5714  0.5215  0.54
Smith 1975   17  0.4540  0.0023  0.1324  0.2918  0.2824  0.28
Szpilman 1948   48  0.3134  0.0043  0.0646  0.0642  0.0745  0.06
Uninsky 1971   25  0.4231  0.0024  0.0821  0.3320  0.4419  0.38
Wasowski 1980   5  0.5421  0.007  0.148  0.694  0.705  0.69
Weissenberg 1971   61  0.2026  0.0057  0.0460  0.0445  0.0749  0.05
Average   2  0.6210  0.002  0.472  0.8935  0.1023  0.30
Random 1    65  0.0261  0.0064  0.0265  0.0212  0.3341  0.08
Random 2   66  -0.0266  0.0066  0.0166  0.0137  0.0566  0.02
Random 3   64  0.0735  0.0065  0.0264  0.0213  0.2942  0.08
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).