Czerny 1949

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   3  0.844  0.103  0.322  0.614  0.536  0.57
Anderszewski 2003   27  0.7210  0.0142  0.0941  0.1946  0.0745  0.12
Ashkenazy 1981   44  0.6461  0.0029  0.0730  0.3819  0.3334  0.35
Bacha 2000   68  0.5384  0.0065  0.0469  0.0474  0.0377  0.03
Badura 1965   26  0.7266  0.0033  0.0633  0.3416  0.5127  0.42
Barbosa 1983   80  0.4248  0.0075  0.0377  0.0351  0.0571  0.04
Biret 1990   63  0.5558  0.0063  0.0652  0.0670  0.0465  0.05
Blet 2003   48  0.6350  0.0060  0.0462  0.0453  0.0662  0.05
Block 1995   64  0.5579  0.0048  0.0470  0.0433  0.1452  0.07
Blumental 1952   69  0.5216  0.0141  0.0743  0.1540  0.1046  0.12
Boshniakovich 1969   18  0.7629  0.0022  0.1024  0.4419  0.4724  0.45
Brailowsky 1960   67  0.5311  0.0173  0.0380  0.0351  0.0478  0.03
Bunin 1987   45  0.6436  0.0037  0.1136  0.315  0.5429  0.41
Bunin 1987b   50  0.6243  0.0036  0.0837  0.315  0.5428  0.41
Chiu 1999   70  0.5067  0.0066  0.0464  0.0476  0.0380  0.03
Cohen 1997   87  0.2249  0.0085  0.0383  0.0364  0.0486  0.03
Cortot 1951   30  0.7125  0.0040  0.0840  0.2417  0.4236  0.32
Csalog 1996   83  0.3485  0.0079  0.0287  0.0251  0.0483  0.03
Czerny 1949   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Czerny 1990   10  0.793  0.118  0.127  0.555  0.5111  0.53
Duchoud 2007   66  0.5480  0.0055  0.0461  0.0430  0.2148  0.09
Ezaki 2006   25  0.7254  0.0034  0.0629  0.3922  0.3533  0.37
Falvay 1989   85  0.2970  0.0087  0.0379  0.0378  0.0289  0.02
Farrell 1958   62  0.5519  0.0159  0.0468  0.0457  0.0570  0.04
Ferenczy 1958   53  0.6062  0.0058  0.0651  0.0667  0.0463  0.05
Fliere 1977   4  0.8317  0.016  0.144  0.5714  0.4116  0.48
Fou 1978   56  0.5871  0.0054  0.0650  0.0674  0.0459  0.05
Francois 1956   47  0.6468  0.0056  0.0467  0.0434  0.1650  0.08
Friedman 1923   9  0.7922  0.0014  0.1111  0.536  0.634  0.58
Friedman 1923b   11  0.7939  0.0012  0.119  0.536  0.633  0.58
Friedman 1930   8  0.7945  0.0018  0.1217  0.496  0.618  0.55
Garcia 2007   32  0.7026  0.0035  0.0739  0.2820  0.3735  0.32
Garcia 2007b   39  0.6772  0.0030  0.0832  0.3411  0.5030  0.41
Gierzod 1998   2  0.852  0.172  0.213  0.596  0.582  0.58
Gornostaeva 1994   46  0.6438  0.0049  0.0554  0.0545  0.0755  0.06
Groot 1988   72  0.4946  0.0061  0.0558  0.0551  0.0666  0.05
Harasiewicz 1955   13  0.7821  0.0013  0.1115  0.519  0.4519  0.48
Hatto 1993   24  0.7212  0.0125  0.1323  0.468  0.5315  0.49
Hatto 1997   22  0.7427  0.0024  0.1322  0.469  0.4922  0.47
Horowitz 1949   23  0.7352  0.0026  0.0925  0.4410  0.5120  0.47
Indjic 1988   20  0.7535  0.0023  0.1221  0.468  0.5118  0.48
Kapell 1951   40  0.6673  0.0027  0.0631  0.3735  0.1340  0.22
Kissin 1993   21  0.7420  0.0117  0.1214  0.5111  0.4814  0.49
Kushner 1989   35  0.6942  0.0053  0.0648  0.0656  0.0560  0.05
Luisada 1991   41  0.6565  0.0045  0.0747  0.0762  0.0553  0.06
Lushtak 2004   52  0.6155  0.0057  0.0471  0.0475  0.0385  0.03
Malcuzynski 1961   38  0.676  0.0521  0.1035  0.312  0.5926  0.43
Magaloff 1978   61  0.5656  0.0070  0.0556  0.0554  0.0656  0.05
Magin 1975   36  0.6830  0.0020  0.1220  0.4719  0.4025  0.43
Michalowski 1933   31  0.7140  0.0019  0.1118  0.489  0.5313  0.50
Milkina 1970   43  0.6524  0.0052  0.0553  0.0545  0.0754  0.06
Mohovich 1999   57  0.5782  0.0062  0.0465  0.0465  0.0573  0.04
Moravec 1969   71  0.4914  0.0172  0.0474  0.0457  0.0567  0.04
Morozova 2008   49  0.6333  0.0044  0.0644  0.1229  0.2442  0.17
Neighaus 1950   6  0.819  0.027  0.158  0.5410  0.5012  0.52
Niedzielski 1931   5  0.8115  0.0110  0.1316  0.512  0.645  0.57
Ohlsson 1999   29  0.7181  0.0028  0.0628  0.3918  0.3832  0.38
Osinska 1989   19  0.7528  0.0039  0.1038  0.2831  0.2539  0.26
Pachmann 1927   51  0.6169  0.0068  0.0555  0.0537  0.1349  0.08
Paderewski 1930   59  0.5674  0.0064  0.0649  0.0648  0.0461  0.05
Perlemuter 1992   42  0.6518  0.0151  0.0472  0.0443  0.1251  0.07
Pierdomenico 2008   81  0.3675  0.0081  0.0382  0.0354  0.0668  0.04
Poblocka 1999   17  0.7677  0.0015  0.1219  0.4711  0.4917  0.48
Rabcewiczowa 1932   65  0.5431  0.0067  0.0559  0.0573  0.0469  0.04
Rachmaninoff 1923   12  0.787  0.0411  0.1110  0.532  0.587  0.55
Rangell 2001   84  0.3357  0.0082  0.0376  0.0357  0.0487  0.03
Richter 1976   34  0.6986  0.0038  0.0834  0.3214  0.5131  0.40
Rosen 1989   54  0.6063  0.0050  0.0463  0.0459  0.0472  0.04
Rosenthal 1930   55  0.598  0.0347  0.0557  0.0515  0.3243  0.13
Rosenthal 1931   77  0.4587  0.0080  0.0286  0.0261  0.0482  0.03
Rosenthal 1931b   76  0.4588  0.0078  0.0381  0.0373  0.0488  0.03
Rosenthal 1931c   75  0.4764  0.0071  0.0460  0.0465  0.0475  0.04
Rosenthal 1931d   78  0.4589  0.0083  0.0466  0.0469  0.0474  0.04
Rossi 2007   79  0.4434  0.0077  0.0285  0.0273  0.0479  0.03
Rubinstein 1939   73  0.4832  0.0074  0.0384  0.0346  0.0758  0.05
Rubinstein 1952   86  0.2560  0.0084  0.0473  0.0481  0.0476  0.04
Rubinstein 1966   74  0.4753  0.0076  0.0375  0.0371  0.0484  0.03
Schilhawsky 1960   1  0.861  0.271  0.261  0.661  0.651  0.65
Shebanova 2002   14  0.7747  0.0016  0.1613  0.5212  0.4123  0.46
Smith 1975   58  0.5751  0.0069  0.0746  0.0773  0.0457  0.05
Sokolov 2002   60  0.5683  0.0046  0.0745  0.0732  0.1944  0.12
Sztompka 1959   7  0.8023  0.009  0.1212  0.5212  0.4321  0.47
Tomsic 1995   82  0.3478  0.0086  0.0378  0.0377  0.0381  0.03
Uninsky 1932   15  0.775  0.065  0.185  0.554  0.559  0.55
Uninsky 1971   16  0.7713  0.014  0.176  0.553  0.5210  0.53
Wasowski 1980   37  0.6741  0.0043  0.0842  0.1823  0.2141  0.19
Zak 1937   28  0.7159  0.0032  0.1226  0.4330  0.2038  0.29
Zak 1951   33  0.6937  0.0031  0.1027  0.4228  0.2137  0.30
Random 1   88  -0.0676  0.0088  0.0288  0.028  0.4847  0.10
Random 2   89  -0.1444  0.0089  0.0289  0.0236  0.1364  0.05
Random 3   90  -0.2090  0.0090  0.0190  0.0175  0.0290  0.01

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).