Block 1995

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   55  0.5746  0.0059  0.0641  0.0658  0.0454  0.05
Ashkenazy 1981   27  0.6832  0.0031  0.1032  0.2043  0.0732  0.12
Beliavsky 2004   51  0.5843  0.0053  0.0549  0.0554  0.0551  0.05
BenOr 1989   6  0.767  0.018  0.162  0.6821  0.316  0.46
Biret 1990   33  0.664  0.0330  0.0930  0.2331  0.1426  0.18
Blet 2003   25  0.6915  0.0033  0.1036  0.1037  0.0638  0.08
Block 1995   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Brailowsky 1960   52  0.5849  0.0045  0.0452  0.0428  0.2135  0.09
Chiu 1999   5  0.7713  0.016  0.199  0.5519  0.445  0.49
Clidat 1994   19  0.7111  0.0111  0.0914  0.5140  0.0627  0.17
Cohen 1997   60  0.4638  0.0060  0.0460  0.0443  0.0657  0.05
Coop 1987   3  0.793  0.103  0.384  0.6225  0.327  0.45
Cortot 1951   50  0.5817  0.0058  0.0453  0.0423  0.3134  0.11
Czerny 1949   37  0.6358  0.0023  0.0728  0.3040  0.0630  0.13
Czerny 1949b   36  0.6565  0.0032  0.1131  0.2140  0.0731  0.12
Ezaki 2006   7  0.7642  0.009  0.2310  0.5428  0.2511  0.37
Falvay 1989   2  0.792  0.132  0.346  0.6218  0.451  0.53
Ferenczy 1958   48  0.5966  0.0048  0.0458  0.0436  0.0846  0.06
Fiorentino 1962   22  0.7014  0.0027  0.1124  0.3533  0.1223  0.20
Fliere 1977   34  0.6562  0.0038  0.0938  0.0945  0.0737  0.08
Fou 1978   16  0.7326  0.0015  0.1013  0.5233  0.1417  0.27
Francois 1956   56  0.5635  0.0055  0.0454  0.0458  0.0465  0.04
Hatto 1997   44  0.6050  0.0049  0.0363  0.0334  0.0853  0.05
Horowitz 1971   42  0.6130  0.0047  0.0459  0.0459  0.0464  0.04
Horowitz 1985   61  0.4534  0.0061  0.0550  0.0559  0.0458  0.04
Indjic 2001   46  0.6048  0.0050  0.0461  0.0438  0.0848  0.06
Kapell 1951   12  0.7439  0.0012  0.1117  0.4834  0.1121  0.23
Kiepura 1999   20  0.7024  0.0028  0.1221  0.4126  0.3510  0.38
Kilenyi 1937   29  0.6855  0.0021  0.1022  0.3951  0.0628  0.15
Kissin 1993   10  0.7537  0.0014  0.128  0.5643  0.0625  0.18
Kitain 1937   63  0.3060  0.0063  0.0645  0.0664  0.0363  0.04
Kushner 1990   39  0.6252  0.0040  0.0642  0.0646  0.0645  0.06
Levy 1951   54  0.5833  0.0042  0.0644  0.0651  0.0550  0.05
Luisada 1990   26  0.6925  0.0029  0.1225  0.3428  0.2416  0.29
Lushtak 2004   18  0.7141  0.0019  0.1318  0.4734  0.0922  0.21
Lympany 1968   21  0.709  0.0120  0.1120  0.4417  0.418  0.42
Magaloff 1977   24  0.6916  0.0034  0.1234  0.1248  0.0639  0.08
Magaloff 1977b   28  0.6829  0.0036  0.1533  0.1551  0.0636  0.09
Magin 1975   4  0.785  0.024  0.355  0.6225  0.462  0.53
Milkina 1970   38  0.6310  0.0141  0.0739  0.0759  0.0544  0.06
Mohovich 1999   45  0.6056  0.0044  0.0548  0.0547  0.0656  0.05
Nadelmann 1956   57  0.5459  0.0057  0.0551  0.0549  0.0552  0.05
Ohlsson 1999   13  0.7423  0.0013  0.1119  0.4723  0.2712  0.36
Olejniczac 1990   23  0.6922  0.0026  0.1123  0.3632  0.1918  0.26
Olejniczak 1991   14  0.7327  0.0017  0.1711  0.5328  0.2013  0.33
Osinska 1989   15  0.7312  0.0118  0.153  0.6456  0.0524  0.18
Paderewski 1912   43  0.6051  0.0043  0.0546  0.0555  0.0555  0.05
Perahia 1994   62  0.4328  0.0062  0.0547  0.0558  0.0462  0.04
Perlemuter 1986   40  0.6245  0.0035  0.1235  0.1260  0.0442  0.07
Poblocka 1999   8  0.766  0.015  0.237  0.5619  0.483  0.52
Rangell 2001   9  0.7621  0.007  0.1612  0.5318  0.474  0.50
Risler 1920   31  0.6764  0.0022  0.0827  0.3331  0.3014  0.31
Rosen 1989   35  0.6563  0.0037  0.0640  0.0628  0.3329  0.14
Rubinstein 1939   58  0.5047  0.0046  0.0455  0.0458  0.0460  0.04
Rubinstein 1952   32  0.668  0.0125  0.0829  0.2841  0.0533  0.12
Rubinstein 1966   53  0.5857  0.0051  0.0457  0.0449  0.0561  0.04
Rummel 1943   59  0.4931  0.0056  0.0643  0.0636  0.0647  0.06
Shebanova 2002   17  0.7236  0.0016  0.1416  0.5031  0.1220  0.24
Smith 1975   47  0.6061  0.0052  0.0456  0.0460  0.0459  0.04
Szpilman 1948   41  0.6240  0.0039  0.0937  0.0951  0.0640  0.07
Uninsky 1971   30  0.6719  0.0024  0.0926  0.3321  0.2615  0.29
Wasowski 1980   49  0.5920  0.0054  0.0462  0.0446  0.0649  0.05
Weissenberg 1971   11  0.7418  0.0010  0.2015  0.5123  0.349  0.42
Average   1  0.811  0.571  0.561  0.8840  0.0719  0.25
Random 1    65  -0.0253  0.0065  0.0265  0.0220  0.2441  0.07
Random 2   64  0.0344  0.0064  0.0364  0.0328  0.1843  0.07
Random 3   66  -0.0854  0.0066  0.0166  0.0155  0.0366  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).