Rubinstein 1952

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   54  0.3663  0.0051  0.0360  0.0326  0.1754  0.07
Ashkenazy 1981   9  0.506  0.018  0.1521  0.487  0.6813  0.57
Beliavsky 2004   61  0.3058  0.0062  0.0454  0.0447  0.0760  0.05
BenOr 1989   10  0.5035  0.0020  0.1212  0.5720  0.5517  0.56
Biret 1990   17  0.4812  0.0024  0.1423  0.418  0.4924  0.45
Blet 2003   21  0.4713  0.0017  0.0919  0.4917  0.5321  0.51
Block 1995   15  0.494  0.0210  0.238  0.615  0.608  0.60
Brailowsky 1960   12  0.5010  0.009  0.1510  0.5717  0.5614  0.56
Chiu 1999   32  0.4351  0.0035  0.0545  0.0519  0.3837  0.14
Clidat 1994   37  0.4154  0.0046  0.0543  0.0544  0.0662  0.05
Cohen 1997   58  0.3357  0.0055  0.0357  0.0316  0.4941  0.12
Coop 1987   5  0.5725  0.005  0.375  0.707  0.606  0.65
Cortot 1951   62  0.2932  0.0063  0.0536  0.0525  0.3438  0.13
Czerny 1949   53  0.3617  0.0039  0.0635  0.0641  0.0757  0.06
Czerny 1949b   49  0.3731  0.0045  0.0449  0.0428  0.2047  0.09
Ezaki 2006   36  0.4138  0.0032  0.1032  0.1929  0.3931  0.27
Falvay 1989   46  0.3723  0.0057  0.0358  0.0332  0.1552  0.07
Ferenczy 1958   23  0.4611  0.0011  0.1415  0.5416  0.5916  0.56
Fiorentino 1962   18  0.4843  0.0021  0.1114  0.5511  0.6310  0.59
Fliere 1977   35  0.4244  0.0033  0.0633  0.0615  0.4433  0.16
Fou 1978   19  0.483  0.0223  0.1117  0.5314  0.6015  0.56
Francois 1956   48  0.3764  0.0048  0.0541  0.0511  0.4836  0.15
Hatto 1997   26  0.4448  0.0028  0.0827  0.2923  0.3828  0.33
Horowitz 1971   59  0.3356  0.0053  0.0363  0.0335  0.0965  0.05
Horowitz 1985   57  0.3465  0.0049  0.0546  0.0534  0.0951  0.07
Indjic 2001   27  0.4447  0.0027  0.0829  0.2824  0.4127  0.34
Kapell 1951   20  0.4726  0.0026  0.1124  0.4016  0.4925  0.44
Kiepura 1999   41  0.3853  0.0040  0.0539  0.0546  0.0558  0.05
Kilenyi 1937   24  0.4516  0.0015  0.0818  0.5218  0.5819  0.55
Kissin 1993   33  0.4234  0.0037  0.0540  0.0532  0.1250  0.08
Kitain 1937   63  0.2742  0.0056  0.0361  0.0337  0.0864  0.05
Kushner 1990   8  0.519  0.0012  0.129  0.5814  0.5612  0.57
Levy 1951   39  0.4059  0.0044  0.0451  0.0424  0.2942  0.11
Luisada 1990   38  0.4014  0.0038  0.0538  0.0517  0.5034  0.16
Lushtak 2004   51  0.3641  0.0059  0.0359  0.0336  0.0963  0.05
Lympany 1968   56  0.3518  0.0054  0.0362  0.0333  0.1255  0.06
Magaloff 1977   31  0.4322  0.0034  0.0542  0.057  0.4635  0.15
Magaloff 1977b   42  0.3827  0.0058  0.0453  0.0417  0.3244  0.11
Magin 1975   11  0.5020  0.0019  0.1116  0.5319  0.5120  0.52
Milkina 1970   6  0.5521  0.006  0.137  0.6312  0.569  0.59
Mohovich 1999   25  0.4549  0.0025  0.0826  0.3716  0.5226  0.44
Nadelmann 1956   13  0.4936  0.0014  0.0920  0.4811  0.4223  0.45
Ohlsson 1999   7  0.5415  0.007  0.196  0.654  0.715  0.68
Olejniczac 1990   14  0.4919  0.0016  0.0911  0.5712  0.667  0.61
Olejniczak 1991   16  0.4850  0.0018  0.1013  0.5612  0.6011  0.58
Osinska 1989   4  0.577  0.014  0.334  0.776  0.693  0.73
Paderewski 1912   40  0.3928  0.0043  0.0450  0.0417  0.3440  0.12
Perahia 1994   28  0.4340  0.0031  0.0931  0.2427  0.2432  0.24
Perlemuter 1986   30  0.4345  0.0029  0.0930  0.2521  0.3130  0.28
Poblocka 1999   55  0.3546  0.0052  0.0356  0.0339  0.0759  0.05
Rangell 2001   52  0.3637  0.0060  0.0448  0.0426  0.2446  0.10
Risler 1920   60  0.3352  0.0061  0.0537  0.0520  0.2839  0.12
Rosen 1989   29  0.4329  0.0013  0.0925  0.3814  0.6122  0.48
Rubinstein 1939   3  0.605  0.023  0.293  0.772  0.792  0.78
Rubinstein 1952   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Rubinstein 1966   2  0.702  0.312  0.772  0.902  0.871  0.88
Rummel 1943   50  0.3639  0.0041  0.0452  0.0413  0.3343  0.11
Shebanova 2002   34  0.4233  0.0036  0.0634  0.0635  0.0953  0.07
Smith 1975   47  0.3730  0.0030  0.1228  0.289  0.3429  0.31
Szpilman 1948   22  0.468  0.0122  0.1022  0.4810  0.6318  0.55
Uninsky 1971   45  0.3824  0.0050  0.0455  0.0437  0.0761  0.05
Wasowski 1980   44  0.3861  0.0047  0.0544  0.0542  0.0756  0.06
Weissenberg 1971   43  0.3860  0.0042  0.0447  0.0425  0.2645  0.10
Average   1  0.711  0.541  0.541  0.918  0.534  0.69
Random 1    64  0.0355  0.0064  0.0264  0.028  0.3848  0.09
Random 2   65  0.0362  0.0065  0.0265  0.0215  0.3849  0.09
Random 3   66  0.0266  0.0066  0.0166  0.0138  0.0766  0.03

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).