Block 1995

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   18  0.6136  0.0042  0.0633  0.1577  0.0348  0.07
Anderszewski 2003   3  0.696  0.057  0.148  0.4214  0.323  0.37
Ashkenazy 1981   62  0.4990  0.0034  0.0437  0.1351  0.0545  0.08
Bacha 2000   69  0.4553  0.0045  0.0445  0.0741  0.1042  0.08
Badura 1965   24  0.5979  0.0059  0.0551  0.0543  0.1740  0.09
Barbosa 1983   72  0.4255  0.0046  0.0555  0.0531  0.1737  0.09
Biret 1990   60  0.4948  0.0039  0.0439  0.1242  0.0933  0.10
Blet 2003   52  0.5210  0.0243  0.0443  0.0938  0.1627  0.12
Block 1995   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Blumental 1952   80  0.3139  0.0078  0.0470  0.0476  0.0384  0.03
Boshniakovich 1969   5  0.6759  0.0012  0.0712  0.3534  0.259  0.30
Brailowsky 1960   39  0.5611  0.0223  0.0626  0.2126  0.2813  0.24
Bunin 1987   74  0.4288  0.0073  0.0375  0.0357  0.0574  0.04
Bunin 1987b   77  0.4063  0.0072  0.0373  0.0356  0.0667  0.04
Chiu 1999   34  0.573  0.115  0.1316  0.2927  0.2412  0.26
Cohen 1997   88  0.1180  0.0088  0.0284  0.0274  0.0389  0.02
Cortot 1951   37  0.5668  0.0049  0.0553  0.0543  0.0951  0.07
Csalog 1996   82  0.2924  0.0081  0.0556  0.0584  0.0281  0.03
Czerny 1949   44  0.5541  0.0021  0.0534  0.1471  0.0447  0.07
Czerny 1990   47  0.5317  0.0168  0.0552  0.0581  0.0375  0.04
Duchoud 2007   64  0.4832  0.0036  0.0436  0.1335  0.1624  0.14
Ezaki 2006   9  0.6545  0.0014  0.0618  0.2846  0.0526  0.12
Falvay 1989   66  0.4729  0.0077  0.0376  0.0344  0.1943  0.08
Farrell 1958   45  0.5437  0.0016  0.0624  0.2339  0.1819  0.20
Ferenczy 1958   27  0.5815  0.0162  0.0461  0.0441  0.1058  0.06
Fliere 1977   16  0.622  0.182  0.194  0.4438  0.1611  0.27
Fou 1978   36  0.5744  0.0037  0.0435  0.1480  0.0354  0.06
Francois 1956   67  0.4689  0.0071  0.0382  0.0378  0.0387  0.03
Friedman 1923   28  0.5819  0.0153  0.0469  0.0458  0.0576  0.04
Friedman 1923b   35  0.5783  0.0060  0.0647  0.0657  0.0562  0.05
Friedman 1930   41  0.5647  0.0066  0.0468  0.0457  0.0660  0.05
Garcia 2007   46  0.5477  0.0055  0.0378  0.0342  0.1550  0.07
Garcia 2007b   48  0.5330  0.0050  0.0648  0.0638  0.1734  0.10
Gierzod 1998   43  0.5534  0.0035  0.0438  0.1265  0.0449  0.07
Gornostaeva 1994   22  0.5942  0.0029  0.0529  0.1836  0.1323  0.15
Groot 1988   8  0.661  0.181  0.182  0.536  0.531  0.53
Harasiewicz 1955   1  0.734  0.066  0.173  0.4542  0.1116  0.22
Hatto 1993   63  0.4849  0.0063  0.0472  0.0444  0.1059  0.06
Hatto 1997   56  0.5081  0.0065  0.0746  0.0756  0.0557  0.06
Horowitz 1949   4  0.6884  0.0013  0.0617  0.2929  0.404  0.34
Indjic 1988   55  0.5062  0.0064  0.0467  0.0461  0.0571  0.04
Kapell 1951   61  0.4921  0.0138  0.0440  0.1183  0.0355  0.06
Kissin 1993   29  0.5869  0.0057  0.0458  0.0467  0.0379  0.03
Kushner 1989   30  0.5874  0.0031  0.0528  0.1858  0.0535  0.09
Luisada 1991   14  0.6218  0.0115  0.0613  0.3243  0.1217  0.20
Lushtak 2004   59  0.4920  0.0151  0.0457  0.0473  0.0383  0.03
Malcuzynski 1961   53  0.5152  0.0056  0.0374  0.0345  0.1356  0.06
Magaloff 1978   75  0.4154  0.0076  0.0381  0.0360  0.0563  0.04
Magin 1975   26  0.5885  0.0024  0.0523  0.2355  0.0529  0.11
Michalowski 1933   68  0.4628  0.0070  0.0465  0.0460  0.0570  0.04
Milkina 1970   10  0.6346  0.0017  0.0715  0.3137  0.1914  0.24
Mohovich 1999   40  0.567  0.044  0.1211  0.3736  0.276  0.32
Moravec 1969   81  0.3182  0.0087  0.0383  0.0385  0.0288  0.02
Morozova 2008   23  0.5923  0.0032  0.0532  0.1647  0.0539  0.09
Neighaus 1950   12  0.6313  0.0219  0.0914  0.3244  0.0920  0.17
Niedzielski 1931   51  0.5270  0.0067  0.0459  0.0459  0.0465  0.04
Ohlsson 1999   57  0.5086  0.0033  0.0531  0.1761  0.0444  0.08
Osinska 1989   2  0.6940  0.009  0.137  0.4336  0.2010  0.29
Pachmann 1927   42  0.5657  0.0074  0.0380  0.0348  0.0569  0.04
Paderewski 1930   70  0.4373  0.0080  0.0550  0.0578  0.0368  0.04
Perlemuter 1992   20  0.6031  0.0040  0.0542  0.1066  0.0453  0.06
Pierdomenico 2008   54  0.5151  0.0018  0.0719  0.2617  0.395  0.32
Poblocka 1999   15  0.6216  0.0128  0.0527  0.1960  0.0530  0.10
Rabcewiczowa 1932   73  0.4250  0.0079  0.0466  0.0463  0.0466  0.04
Rachmaninoff 1923   49  0.5356  0.0061  0.0549  0.0579  0.0364  0.04
Rangell 2001   58  0.495  0.063  0.1310  0.377  0.472  0.42
Richter 1976   19  0.6125  0.0044  0.0444  0.0837  0.3121  0.16
Rosen 1989   32  0.5722  0.0125  0.0525  0.2244  0.0728  0.12
Rosenthal 1930   79  0.3187  0.0082  0.0379  0.0384  0.0382  0.03
Rosenthal 1931   84  0.2760  0.0083  0.0286  0.0260  0.0580  0.03
Rosenthal 1931b   85  0.2778  0.0084  0.0288  0.0260  0.0586  0.03
Rosenthal 1931c   87  0.1875  0.0086  0.0287  0.0288  0.0290  0.02
Rosenthal 1931d   83  0.2871  0.0085  0.0285  0.0259  0.0585  0.03
Rossi 2007   65  0.4758  0.0075  0.0377  0.0337  0.1546  0.07
Rubinstein 1939   76  0.4076  0.0069  0.0464  0.0483  0.0378  0.03
Rubinstein 1952   86  0.2614  0.0154  0.0471  0.0445  0.1352  0.07
Rubinstein 1966   71  0.4227  0.0047  0.0554  0.0543  0.1738  0.09
Schilhawsky 1960   50  0.5365  0.0052  0.0462  0.0454  0.0572  0.04
Shebanova 2002   13  0.6335  0.0020  0.075  0.4363  0.0425  0.13
Smith 1975   31  0.5772  0.0022  0.0522  0.2535  0.1618  0.20
Sokolov 2002   78  0.4038  0.0048  0.0460  0.0476  0.0377  0.03
Sztompka 1959   11  0.6326  0.0011  0.076  0.4345  0.1115  0.22
Tomsic 1995   21  0.609  0.0330  0.0630  0.1816  0.498  0.30
Uninsky 1932   17  0.6291  0.0058  0.0463  0.0465  0.0573  0.04
Uninsky 1971   33  0.5766  0.0041  0.0441  0.1147  0.0836  0.09
Wasowski 1980   6  0.6733  0.008  0.119  0.4122  0.227  0.30
Zak 1937   25  0.5912  0.0226  0.0520  0.2659  0.0431  0.10
Zak 1951   38  0.5643  0.0027  0.0521  0.2563  0.0432  0.10
Average   7  0.678  0.0310  0.091  0.5762  0.0422  0.15
Random 1   90  -0.1667  0.0090  0.0190  0.0122  0.2761  0.05
Random 2   91  -0.2861  0.0091  0.0191  0.0187  0.0291  0.01
Random 3   89  -0.0264  0.0089  0.0289  0.0221  0.3741  0.09

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).