Brailowsky 1960

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   59  0.5047  0.0059  0.0557  0.0547  0.0558  0.05
Ashkenazy 1981   43  0.5648  0.0047  0.0748  0.0761  0.0549  0.06
Beliavsky 2004   61  0.4549  0.0061  0.0462  0.0452  0.0654  0.05
BenOr 1989   3  0.695  0.062  0.222  0.7458  0.059  0.19
Biret 1990   25  0.6124  0.0026  0.0826  0.2853  0.0525  0.12
Blet 2003   12  0.646  0.056  0.208  0.6144  0.0511  0.17
Block 1995   36  0.5829  0.0029  0.0928  0.2152  0.0430  0.09
Brailowsky 1960   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Chiu 1999   60  0.4832  0.0056  0.0842  0.0862  0.0352  0.05
Clidat 1994   10  0.6430  0.0013  0.1319  0.4342  0.0615  0.16
Cohen 1997   62  0.3837  0.0063  0.0558  0.0563  0.0363  0.04
Coop 1987   49  0.5646  0.0034  0.0841  0.0858  0.0443  0.06
Cortot 1951   58  0.5012  0.0262  0.0656  0.0662  0.0365  0.04
Czerny 1949   11  0.647  0.0412  0.1911  0.5661  0.0416  0.15
Czerny 1949b   17  0.6250  0.0020  0.1017  0.4460  0.0420  0.13
Ezaki 2006   24  0.6133  0.0014  0.1415  0.4737  0.096  0.21
Falvay 1989   38  0.5835  0.0028  0.0829  0.2159  0.0429  0.09
Ferenczy 1958   19  0.624  0.064  0.2312  0.5517  0.562  0.55
Fiorentino 1962   31  0.6056  0.0027  0.0925  0.3160  0.0428  0.11
Fliere 1977   34  0.5944  0.0039  0.1133  0.1162  0.0533  0.07
Fou 1978   5  0.668  0.047  0.237  0.6252  0.068  0.19
Francois 1956   29  0.6064  0.0038  0.0934  0.0948  0.0539  0.07
Hatto 1997   55  0.5166  0.0057  0.0561  0.0557  0.0557  0.05
Horowitz 1971   8  0.6416  0.0017  0.1221  0.3960  0.0424  0.12
Horowitz 1985   47  0.5618  0.0041  0.0749  0.0737  0.0834  0.07
Indjic 2001   56  0.5157  0.0058  0.0560  0.0557  0.0559  0.05
Kapell 1951   33  0.5919  0.0024  0.0924  0.3556  0.0521  0.13
Kiepura 1999   27  0.6017  0.0032  0.0832  0.1659  0.0431  0.08
Kilenyi 1937   32  0.6023  0.0021  0.0920  0.4258  0.0519  0.14
Kissin 1993   51  0.5338  0.0052  0.0655  0.0647  0.0645  0.06
Kitain 1937   63  0.3331  0.0060  0.0463  0.0463  0.0464  0.04
Kushner 1990   20  0.6221  0.0025  0.0923  0.3659  0.0423  0.12
Levy 1951   40  0.5755  0.0019  0.1022  0.3759  0.0422  0.12
Luisada 1990   15  0.6327  0.0023  0.0927  0.2248  0.0627  0.11
Lushtak 2004   42  0.5742  0.0044  0.0937  0.0962  0.0447  0.06
Lympany 1968   26  0.6114  0.0135  0.0745  0.0758  0.0451  0.05
Magaloff 1977   37  0.5840  0.0046  0.0750  0.0757  0.0546  0.06
Magaloff 1977b   44  0.5662  0.0049  0.0652  0.0660  0.0460  0.05
Magin 1975   14  0.6310  0.0318  0.1313  0.5458  0.0513  0.16
Milkina 1970   30  0.6059  0.0036  0.0936  0.0961  0.0442  0.06
Mohovich 1999   39  0.5725  0.0040  0.0747  0.0751  0.0548  0.06
Nadelmann 1956   4  0.6811  0.029  0.183  0.6841  0.067  0.20
Ohlsson 1999   57  0.5143  0.0055  0.0653  0.0655  0.0555  0.05
Olejniczac 1990   23  0.6145  0.0016  0.1314  0.5359  0.0514  0.16
Olejniczak 1991   28  0.6058  0.0031  0.0931  0.1862  0.0432  0.08
Osinska 1989   2  0.699  0.045  0.204  0.6758  0.0510  0.18
Paderewski 1912   53  0.5352  0.0053  0.0559  0.0561  0.0461  0.04
Perahia 1994   46  0.5651  0.0051  0.0939  0.0947  0.0538  0.07
Perlemuter 1986   18  0.6253  0.0033  0.0938  0.0962  0.0444  0.06
Poblocka 1999   6  0.653  0.0811  0.196  0.6438  0.085  0.23
Rangell 2001   54  0.5363  0.0054  0.0746  0.0760  0.0550  0.06
Risler 1920   50  0.5539  0.0043  0.0843  0.0852  0.0635  0.07
Rosen 1989   9  0.642  0.163  0.175  0.6412  0.531  0.58
Rubinstein 1939   48  0.5620  0.0048  0.0654  0.0648  0.0553  0.05
Rubinstein 1952   13  0.6415  0.018  0.2310  0.6057  0.0417  0.15
Rubinstein 1966   7  0.6534  0.0010  0.219  0.6042  0.0512  0.17
Rummel 1943   16  0.6313  0.0115  0.1518  0.4423  0.223  0.31
Shebanova 2002   35  0.5941  0.0030  0.0930  0.1943  0.0626  0.11
Smith 1975   21  0.6226  0.0037  0.0940  0.0942  0.0536  0.07
Szpilman 1948   22  0.6128  0.0022  0.1216  0.4662  0.0418  0.14
Uninsky 1971   41  0.5736  0.0042  0.0651  0.0654  0.0556  0.05
Wasowski 1980   45  0.5654  0.0045  0.0844  0.0853  0.0540  0.06
Weissenberg 1971   52  0.5360  0.0050  0.0935  0.0958  0.0441  0.06
Average   1  0.721  0.341  0.331  0.8645  0.074  0.25
Random 1    65  -0.0365  0.0064  0.0264  0.0219  0.2537  0.07
Random 2   64  -0.0261  0.0065  0.0265  0.0266  0.0166  0.01
Random 3   66  -0.0722  0.0066  0.0166  0.0131  0.1562  0.04

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).