Cortot 1951

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   17  0.6951  0.0029  0.0829  0.2855  0.0535  0.12
Anderszewski 2003   36  0.6252  0.0054  0.0547  0.0566  0.0469  0.04
Ashkenazy 1981   38  0.6218  0.0118  0.0916  0.4539  0.1517  0.26
Bacha 2000   64  0.5548  0.0061  0.0474  0.0471  0.0454  0.04
Badura 1965   66  0.5532  0.0070  0.0463  0.0463  0.0576  0.04
Barbosa 1983   78  0.4770  0.0075  0.0552  0.0561  0.0466  0.04
Biret 1990   25  0.6642  0.0013  0.1019  0.4136  0.1815  0.27
Blet 2003   29  0.6576  0.0050  0.0459  0.0464  0.0570  0.04
Block 1995   61  0.5644  0.0042  0.0543  0.0953  0.0548  0.07
Blumental 1952   47  0.6047  0.0049  0.0456  0.0448  0.0652  0.05
Boshniakovich 1969   23  0.6727  0.0030  0.0827  0.3046  0.0728  0.14
Brailowsky 1960   53  0.5963  0.0060  0.0378  0.0350  0.0556  0.04
Bunin 1987   71  0.5266  0.0068  0.0553  0.0525  0.3333  0.13
Bunin 1987b   73  0.5084  0.0067  0.0380  0.0325  0.3242  0.10
Chiu 1999   63  0.5531  0.0056  0.0470  0.0448  0.0457  0.04
Cohen 1997   88  0.2967  0.0086  0.0288  0.0273  0.0391  0.02
Cortot 1951   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Csalog 1996   80  0.4624  0.0172  0.0473  0.0449  0.0568  0.04
Czerny 1949   12  0.7125  0.0123  0.1018  0.4241  0.2413  0.32
Czerny 1990   30  0.6586  0.0048  0.0458  0.0483  0.0389  0.03
Duchoud 2007   57  0.5830  0.0040  0.0540  0.1211  0.3819  0.21
Ezaki 2006   14  0.7019  0.0122  0.0923  0.4053  0.0429  0.13
Falvay 1989   87  0.3688  0.0088  0.0287  0.0253  0.0758  0.04
Farrell 1958   42  0.618  0.0235  0.0833  0.2260  0.0541  0.10
Ferenczy 1958   40  0.6239  0.0057  0.0462  0.0450  0.0574  0.04
Fliere 1977   5  0.7471  0.0014  0.1011  0.4754  0.0526  0.15
Fou 1978   46  0.6043  0.0052  0.0550  0.0557  0.0463  0.04
Francois 1956   76  0.4879  0.0083  0.0384  0.0365  0.0490  0.03
Friedman 1923   33  0.6480  0.0045  0.0445  0.0856  0.0550  0.06
Friedman 1923b   34  0.6489  0.0039  0.0538  0.1450  0.0644  0.09
Friedman 1930   32  0.6434  0.0047  0.0455  0.0458  0.0573  0.04
Garcia 2007   2  0.7512  0.018  0.138  0.5117  0.454  0.48
Garcia 2007b   20  0.6926  0.0117  0.1012  0.4628  0.3210  0.38
Gierzod 1998   35  0.6387  0.0053  0.0551  0.0566  0.0475  0.04
Gornostaeva 1994   58  0.5813  0.0174  0.0461  0.0472  0.0388  0.03
Groot 1988   45  0.6155  0.0036  0.0737  0.1541  0.1922  0.17
Harasiewicz 1955   7  0.733  0.073  0.213  0.6125  0.326  0.44
Hatto 1993   52  0.5946  0.0034  0.0934  0.2247  0.0640  0.11
Hatto 1997   41  0.6120  0.0132  0.1030  0.2462  0.0539  0.11
Horowitz 1949   8  0.7221  0.019  0.125  0.5510  0.521  0.53
Indjic 1988   44  0.6164  0.0033  0.0831  0.2247  0.0638  0.11
Kapell 1951   3  0.741  0.321  0.321  0.6311  0.345  0.46
Kissin 1993   24  0.6637  0.0031  0.0828  0.2949  0.0437  0.11
Kushner 1989   56  0.5835  0.0069  0.0383  0.0356  0.0564  0.04
Luisada 1991   55  0.5956  0.0063  0.0460  0.0467  0.0455  0.04
Lushtak 2004   49  0.6022  0.0128  0.0835  0.1737  0.1525  0.16
Malcuzynski 1961   28  0.652  0.242  0.2414  0.454  0.513  0.48
Magaloff 1978   74  0.5057  0.0079  0.0379  0.0387  0.0381  0.03
Magin 1975   48  0.6068  0.0055  0.0548  0.0576  0.0361  0.04
Michalowski 1933   54  0.5972  0.0065  0.0477  0.0457  0.0565  0.04
Milkina 1970   31  0.6459  0.0046  0.0454  0.0478  0.0383  0.03
Mohovich 1999   39  0.6290  0.0041  0.0542  0.1157  0.0646  0.08
Moravec 1969   59  0.5833  0.0044  0.0444  0.0930  0.2823  0.16
Morozova 2008   43  0.6140  0.0051  0.0549  0.0555  0.0472  0.04
Neighaus 1950   15  0.6914  0.0115  0.0915  0.4537  0.1616  0.27
Niedzielski 1931   9  0.7216  0.0111  0.1310  0.4831  0.317  0.39
Ohlsson 1999   60  0.5891  0.0037  0.0536  0.1662  0.0445  0.08
Osinska 1989   13  0.7161  0.0025  0.1021  0.4149  0.0624  0.16
Pachmann 1927   75  0.4850  0.0087  0.0386  0.0361  0.0485  0.03
Paderewski 1930   50  0.5917  0.0164  0.0466  0.0462  0.0384  0.03
Perlemuter 1992   19  0.6938  0.0020  0.0724  0.3939  0.1418  0.23
Pierdomenico 2008   86  0.3711  0.0184  0.0464  0.0475  0.0459  0.04
Poblocka 1999   26  0.665  0.0212  0.1120  0.4134  0.2314  0.31
Rabcewiczowa 1932   68  0.5553  0.0076  0.0646  0.0682  0.0362  0.04
Rachmaninoff 1923   22  0.6829  0.0027  0.0926  0.3559  0.0434  0.12
Rangell 2001   83  0.4441  0.0071  0.0469  0.0440  0.1547  0.08
Richter 1976   37  0.627  0.0226  0.1032  0.2212  0.5312  0.34
Rosen 1989   65  0.5577  0.0073  0.0472  0.0488  0.0287  0.03
Rosenthal 1930   67  0.5549  0.0066  0.0467  0.0438  0.1049  0.06
Rosenthal 1931   77  0.4881  0.0078  0.0468  0.0473  0.0467  0.04
Rosenthal 1931b   79  0.4782  0.0080  0.0465  0.0451  0.0653  0.05
Rosenthal 1931c   82  0.4683  0.0082  0.0457  0.0467  0.0479  0.04
Rosenthal 1931d   81  0.4685  0.0081  0.0385  0.0360  0.0578  0.04
Rossi 2007   72  0.5115  0.0143  0.0441  0.1144  0.1136  0.11
Rubinstein 1939   69  0.5458  0.0059  0.0476  0.0471  0.0460  0.04
Rubinstein 1952   85  0.4075  0.0077  0.0475  0.0471  0.0480  0.04
Rubinstein 1966   62  0.5569  0.0058  0.0381  0.0346  0.0671  0.04
Schilhawsky 1960   6  0.739  0.026  0.134  0.5620  0.472  0.51
Shebanova 2002   16  0.6954  0.0024  0.0817  0.4358  0.0432  0.13
Smith 1975   51  0.5973  0.0062  0.0471  0.0484  0.0382  0.03
Sokolov 2002   70  0.5360  0.0038  0.0539  0.1443  0.1230  0.13
Sztompka 1959   11  0.716  0.027  0.147  0.5150  0.0720  0.19
Tomsic 1995   84  0.4236  0.0085  0.0382  0.0352  0.0751  0.05
Uninsky 1932   4  0.7410  0.0110  0.176  0.5332  0.288  0.39
Uninsky 1971   18  0.6928  0.0016  0.0813  0.4637  0.329  0.38
Wasowski 1980   10  0.7123  0.015  0.149  0.5121  0.2411  0.35
Zak 1937   21  0.6865  0.0019  0.0922  0.4058  0.0431  0.13
Zak 1951   27  0.6678  0.0021  0.0725  0.3855  0.0527  0.14
Average   1  0.794  0.074  0.282  0.6248  0.0621  0.19
Random 1   89  -0.0774  0.0089  0.0289  0.026  0.5443  0.10
Random 2   91  -0.1662  0.0091  0.0191  0.0144  0.0786  0.03
Random 3   90  -0.1145  0.0090  0.0190  0.0139  0.1577  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).