Chiu 1999

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   27  0.6618  0.0240  0.0537  0.1849  0.0543  0.09
Anderszewski 2003   24  0.675  0.0512  0.0616  0.3034  0.2214  0.26
Ashkenazy 1981   15  0.7034  0.0021  0.069  0.3831  0.2211  0.29
Bacha 2000   6  0.739  0.034  0.098  0.403  0.483  0.44
Badura 1965   34  0.6179  0.0072  0.0457  0.0451  0.0662  0.05
Barbosa 1983   2  0.771  0.181  0.181  0.501  0.681  0.58
Biret 1990   19  0.6839  0.0030  0.0522  0.2543  0.0935  0.15
Blet 2003   50  0.5674  0.0066  0.0377  0.0349  0.0761  0.05
Block 1995   48  0.572  0.112  0.1126  0.2415  0.2915  0.26
Blumental 1952   7  0.733  0.093  0.0910  0.3514  0.2510  0.30
Boshniakovich 1969   67  0.4752  0.0073  0.0448  0.0463  0.0571  0.04
Brailowsky 1960   5  0.7314  0.025  0.107  0.417  0.512  0.46
Bunin 1987   75  0.3857  0.0078  0.0375  0.0351  0.0672  0.04
Bunin 1987b   78  0.3670  0.0077  0.0366  0.0350  0.0757  0.05
Chiu 1999   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Cohen 1997   31  0.6537  0.0065  0.0374  0.0331  0.2644  0.09
Cortot 1951   52  0.5526  0.0170  0.0447  0.0469  0.0475  0.04
Csalog 1996   80  0.338  0.0326  0.0636  0.1825  0.2822  0.22
Czerny 1949   64  0.5083  0.0075  0.0376  0.0364  0.0486  0.03
Czerny 1990   21  0.6841  0.0019  0.0524  0.2441  0.1034  0.15
Duchoud 2007   58  0.5240  0.0051  0.0459  0.0443  0.1152  0.07
Ezaki 2006   1  0.807  0.036  0.092  0.4614  0.414  0.43
Falvay 1989   33  0.6228  0.0138  0.0542  0.1430  0.4117  0.24
Farrell 1958   12  0.7155  0.0031  0.0619  0.2840  0.1721  0.22
Ferenczy 1958   42  0.5947  0.0046  0.0450  0.0438  0.1055  0.06
Fliere 1977   36  0.6144  0.0044  0.0644  0.1259  0.0546  0.08
Fou 1978   23  0.6751  0.0042  0.0741  0.1451  0.0450  0.07
Francois 1956   57  0.5250  0.0059  0.0455  0.0468  0.0476  0.04
Friedman 1923   11  0.724  0.0613  0.0623  0.2540  0.2616  0.25
Friedman 1923b   13  0.7125  0.0115  0.0529  0.2340  0.2420  0.23
Friedman 1930   18  0.7023  0.0137  0.0538  0.1541  0.2329  0.19
Garcia 2007   41  0.5962  0.0068  0.0380  0.0356  0.0570  0.04
Garcia 2007b   53  0.5530  0.0164  0.0383  0.0360  0.0577  0.04
Gierzod 1998   63  0.5038  0.0052  0.0456  0.0470  0.0469  0.04
Gornostaeva 1994   69  0.4643  0.0057  0.0463  0.0458  0.0573  0.04
Groot 1988   32  0.6321  0.0111  0.0717  0.2919  0.398  0.34
Harasiewicz 1955   8  0.7220  0.0114  0.0530  0.2365  0.0538  0.11
Hatto 1993   14  0.7084  0.0034  0.0831  0.2338  0.1727  0.20
Hatto 1997   9  0.7215  0.0233  0.1025  0.2439  0.1726  0.20
Horowitz 1949   62  0.5166  0.0079  0.0451  0.0465  0.0564  0.04
Indjic 1988   10  0.7280  0.0032  0.0527  0.2439  0.1724  0.20
Kapell 1951   66  0.4712  0.028  0.1011  0.3449  0.0537  0.13
Kissin 1993   56  0.5375  0.0058  0.0545  0.0564  0.0465  0.04
Kushner 1989   38  0.6042  0.0036  0.0633  0.2140  0.1232  0.16
Luisada 1991   4  0.766  0.047  0.103  0.4522  0.305  0.37
Lushtak 2004   3  0.7632  0.0120  0.0615  0.3030  0.1819  0.23
Malcuzynski 1961   82  0.2767  0.0080  0.0385  0.0381  0.0381  0.03
Magaloff 1978   54  0.5522  0.0153  0.0458  0.0446  0.0854  0.06
Magin 1975   60  0.5113  0.0223  0.0714  0.3335  0.1818  0.24
Michalowski 1933   74  0.4073  0.0076  0.0370  0.0370  0.0484  0.03
Milkina 1970   51  0.5668  0.0049  0.0449  0.0472  0.0380  0.03
Mohovich 1999   25  0.6731  0.019  0.1013  0.3327  0.377  0.35
Moravec 1969   65  0.4858  0.0048  0.0373  0.0330  0.2542  0.09
Morozova 2008   20  0.6829  0.0122  0.0721  0.2638  0.1625  0.20
Neighaus 1950   44  0.5810  0.0328  0.0843  0.1344  0.0841  0.10
Niedzielski 1931   59  0.5287  0.0047  0.0453  0.0480  0.0379  0.03
Ohlsson 1999   47  0.5735  0.0027  0.0632  0.2141  0.1331  0.17
Osinska 1989   39  0.6076  0.0054  0.0368  0.0363  0.0478  0.03
Pachmann 1927   61  0.5161  0.0081  0.0384  0.0367  0.0383  0.03
Paderewski 1930   55  0.5456  0.0069  0.0365  0.0368  0.0382  0.03
Perlemuter 1992   17  0.7059  0.0041  0.0640  0.1466  0.0447  0.07
Pierdomenico 2008   77  0.3653  0.0071  0.0461  0.0443  0.1349  0.07
Poblocka 1999   76  0.3863  0.0056  0.0462  0.0461  0.0563  0.04
Rabcewiczowa 1932   35  0.6171  0.0016  0.0520  0.2734  0.1428  0.19
Rachmaninoff 1923   28  0.6664  0.0039  0.0734  0.1940  0.1136  0.14
Rangell 2001   81  0.2777  0.0062  0.0460  0.0435  0.1945  0.09
Richter 1976   79  0.3581  0.0082  0.0452  0.0455  0.0658  0.05
Rosen 1989   46  0.5733  0.0135  0.0628  0.2371  0.0439  0.10
Rosenthal 1930   84  0.2482  0.0083  0.0369  0.0387  0.0289  0.02
Rosenthal 1931   86  0.2378  0.0084  0.0286  0.0270  0.0485  0.03
Rosenthal 1931b   85  0.2490  0.0085  0.0288  0.0271  0.0487  0.03
Rosenthal 1931c   87  0.1965  0.0087  0.0372  0.0370  0.0488  0.03
Rosenthal 1931d   83  0.2588  0.0086  0.0382  0.0361  0.0574  0.04
Rossi 2007   30  0.6519  0.0250  0.0371  0.0333  0.1748  0.07
Rubinstein 1939   37  0.6160  0.0063  0.0378  0.0342  0.1056  0.05
Rubinstein 1952   71  0.4672  0.0029  0.0435  0.1939  0.2523  0.22
Rubinstein 1966   16  0.7024  0.0124  0.0618  0.2919  0.389  0.33
Schilhawsky 1960   68  0.4754  0.0074  0.0381  0.0352  0.0666  0.04
Shebanova 2002   40  0.5917  0.0225  0.0612  0.3443  0.1030  0.18
Smith 1975   49  0.5769  0.0043  0.0639  0.1435  0.1633  0.15
Sokolov 2002   70  0.4636  0.0055  0.0367  0.0344  0.1153  0.06
Sztompka 1959   43  0.5948  0.0045  0.0546  0.0551  0.0659  0.05
Tomsic 1995   72  0.4449  0.0067  0.0379  0.0339  0.1751  0.07
Uninsky 1932   45  0.5846  0.0060  0.0364  0.0356  0.0667  0.04
Uninsky 1971   73  0.4211  0.0361  0.0454  0.0457  0.0660  0.05
Wasowski 1980   22  0.6716  0.0210  0.076  0.4316  0.316  0.37
Zak 1937   26  0.6745  0.0018  0.095  0.4538  0.1513  0.26
Zak 1951   29  0.6527  0.0117  0.064  0.4538  0.1612  0.27
Random 1   90  -0.3085  0.0090  0.0190  0.0186  0.0290  0.01
Random 2   88  -0.0186  0.0089  0.0289  0.0240  0.0968  0.04
Random 3   89  -0.0889  0.0088  0.0287  0.028  0.5240  0.10

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).