Badura 1965

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   24  0.415  0.0330  0.0731  0.2621  0.418  0.33
Anderszewski 2003   5  0.489  0.026  0.266  0.5538  0.275  0.39
Ashkenazy 1981   49  0.356  0.0256  0.0747  0.0737  0.1936  0.12
Bacha 2000   65  0.3137  0.0066  0.0375  0.0379  0.0375  0.03
Badura 1965   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Barbosa 1983   35  0.3975  0.0044  0.0541  0.1257  0.0744  0.09
Biret 1990   20  0.4214  0.0131  0.0833  0.2550  0.0638  0.12
Blet 2003   26  0.4132  0.0041  0.0538  0.1430  0.2222  0.18
Block 1995   57  0.3359  0.0052  0.0655  0.0649  0.0657  0.06
Blumental 1952   72  0.2978  0.0082  0.0373  0.0384  0.0384  0.03
Boshniakovich 1969   25  0.4125  0.009  0.0818  0.4346  0.0818  0.19
Brailowsky 1960   60  0.3369  0.0069  0.0463  0.0479  0.0378  0.03
Bunin 1987   47  0.3523  0.0022  0.0825  0.3524  0.319  0.33
Bunin 1987b   42  0.3760  0.0023  0.1122  0.3718  0.406  0.38
Chiu 1999   44  0.368  0.0236  0.0634  0.2141  0.1519  0.18
Cohen 1997   85  0.2083  0.0076  0.0285  0.0288  0.0288  0.02
Cortot 1951   88  0.1577  0.0088  0.0283  0.0285  0.0290  0.02
Csalog 1996   8  0.4535  0.0016  0.1014  0.4538  0.1812  0.28
Czerny 1949   55  0.3484  0.0046  0.0652  0.0658  0.0756  0.06
Czerny 1990   19  0.4218  0.0110  0.079  0.4854  0.0623  0.17
Duchoud 2007   69  0.3027  0.0020  0.0730  0.2716  0.537  0.38
Ezaki 2006   17  0.4224  0.0035  0.0732  0.2663  0.0539  0.11
Falvay 1989   11  0.4453  0.0015  0.0813  0.4660  0.0525  0.15
Farrell 1958   68  0.3073  0.0072  0.0371  0.0360  0.0570  0.04
Ferenczy 1958   28  0.4026  0.0053  0.0556  0.0540  0.1745  0.09
Fliere 1977   22  0.4117  0.0147  0.0557  0.0557  0.0558  0.05
Fou 1978   15  0.4216  0.0132  0.1128  0.2864  0.0440  0.11
Francois 1956   81  0.2485  0.0078  0.0369  0.0355  0.0574  0.04
Friedman 1923   23  0.4152  0.0012  0.0815  0.4512  0.534  0.49
Friedman 1923b   14  0.4415  0.018  0.198  0.488  0.573  0.52
Friedman 1930   61  0.3320  0.0150  0.0749  0.0741  0.1741  0.11
Garcia 2007   78  0.2547  0.0074  0.0289  0.0243  0.1465  0.05
Garcia 2007b   70  0.2965  0.0061  0.0558  0.0550  0.0666  0.05
Gierzod 1998   16  0.4279  0.0027  0.0827  0.3466  0.0434  0.12
Gornostaeva 1994   31  0.4055  0.0025  0.0819  0.3867  0.0437  0.12
Groot 1988   38  0.3833  0.0043  0.0544  0.1048  0.0648  0.08
Harasiewicz 1955   12  0.4456  0.0028  0.0824  0.3550  0.0724  0.16
Hatto 1993   13  0.4461  0.0019  0.0717  0.4554  0.0529  0.15
Hatto 1997   7  0.4549  0.0011  0.0811  0.4750  0.0528  0.15
Horowitz 1949   84  0.2121  0.0185  0.0368  0.0368  0.0480  0.03
Indjic 1988   10  0.4542  0.0013  0.0710  0.4749  0.0526  0.15
Kapell 1951   53  0.3480  0.0058  0.0746  0.0760  0.0654  0.06
Kissin 1993   18  0.4281  0.0024  0.0820  0.3850  0.0921  0.18
Kushner 1989   9  0.4548  0.007  0.257  0.5248  0.0815  0.20
Luisada 1991   59  0.3339  0.0065  0.0465  0.0456  0.0567  0.04
Lushtak 2004   30  0.4070  0.0029  0.0726  0.3573  0.0435  0.12
Malcuzynski 1961   27  0.4182  0.0021  0.0716  0.4543  0.1613  0.27
Magaloff 1978   33  0.3971  0.0054  0.0651  0.0658  0.0559  0.05
Magin 1975   29  0.4088  0.0048  0.0748  0.0777  0.0361  0.05
Michalowski 1933   82  0.2440  0.0079  0.0286  0.0231  0.2250  0.07
Milkina 1970   3  0.4929  0.004  0.165  0.5748  0.0716  0.20
Mohovich 1999   41  0.3762  0.0042  0.0540  0.1479  0.0451  0.07
Moravec 1969   73  0.2989  0.0083  0.0381  0.0374  0.0476  0.03
Morozova 2008   2  0.532  0.252  0.422  0.669  0.591  0.62
Neighaus 1950   48  0.3512  0.0151  0.0654  0.0629  0.2732  0.13
Niedzielski 1931   66  0.314  0.0417  0.0745  0.1036  0.1433  0.12
Ohlsson 1999   6  0.463  0.093  0.363  0.619  0.582  0.59
Osinska 1989   4  0.4910  0.015  0.214  0.6044  0.1610  0.31
Pachmann 1927   83  0.2263  0.0081  0.0284  0.0260  0.0481  0.03
Paderewski 1930   87  0.1846  0.0087  0.0467  0.0448  0.0663  0.05
Perlemuter 1992   74  0.2857  0.0073  0.0374  0.0358  0.0477  0.03
Pierdomenico 2008   86  0.1990  0.0086  0.0282  0.0274  0.0386  0.02
Poblocka 1999   52  0.3486  0.0059  0.0561  0.0575  0.0468  0.04
Rabcewiczowa 1932   62  0.3328  0.0045  0.0543  0.1071  0.0453  0.06
Rachmaninoff 1923   58  0.3311  0.0163  0.0372  0.0363  0.0569  0.04
Rangell 2001   80  0.2587  0.0075  0.0288  0.0281  0.0389  0.02
Richter 1976   40  0.3713  0.0155  0.0750  0.0765  0.0362  0.05
Rosen 1989   34  0.3938  0.0014  0.0723  0.3642  0.2014  0.27
Rosenthal 1930   76  0.2868  0.0067  0.0378  0.0365  0.0483  0.03
Rosenthal 1931   64  0.3230  0.0068  0.0466  0.0475  0.0471  0.04
Rosenthal 1931b   67  0.3019  0.0170  0.0464  0.0457  0.0572  0.04
Rosenthal 1931c   56  0.3458  0.0064  0.0376  0.0357  0.0673  0.04
Rosenthal 1931d   75  0.2822  0.0184  0.0377  0.0367  0.0485  0.03
Rossi 2007   79  0.2541  0.0077  0.0370  0.0363  0.0479  0.03
Rubinstein 1939   50  0.3551  0.0037  0.0537  0.1960  0.0443  0.09
Rubinstein 1952   51  0.3566  0.0039  0.0535  0.1961  0.0446  0.09
Rubinstein 1966   21  0.4136  0.0018  0.0612  0.4662  0.0527  0.15
Schilhawsky 1960   63  0.3243  0.0071  0.0379  0.0373  0.0382  0.03
Shebanova 2002   46  0.3591  0.0040  0.0542  0.1251  0.0647  0.08
Smith 1975   54  0.3444  0.0062  0.0560  0.0564  0.0560  0.05
Sokolov 2002   45  0.3634  0.0057  0.0559  0.0545  0.1149  0.07
Sztompka 1959   71  0.2972  0.0060  0.0562  0.0556  0.0564  0.05
Tomsic 1995   36  0.397  0.0226  0.0921  0.3832  0.2511  0.31
Uninsky 1932   77  0.2754  0.0080  0.0380  0.0341  0.1355  0.06
Uninsky 1971   32  0.4050  0.0033  0.0729  0.2750  0.0631  0.13
Wasowski 1980   39  0.3745  0.0049  0.0653  0.0652  0.0652  0.06
Zak 1937   43  0.3767  0.0038  0.0539  0.1443  0.1330  0.13
Zak 1951   37  0.3831  0.0034  0.0736  0.1935  0.1720  0.18
Average   1  0.571  0.331  0.331  0.7358  0.0517  0.19
Random 1   89  0.0064  0.0089  0.0287  0.028  0.4842  0.10
Random 2   91  -0.1576  0.0091  0.0191  0.0191  0.0191  0.01
Random 3   90  -0.0974  0.0090  0.0290  0.0270  0.0387  0.02

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).