Morozova 2008

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   65  0.3341  0.0064  0.0471  0.0441  0.1549  0.08
Anderszewski 2003   25  0.4738  0.0010  0.1215  0.5430  0.4215  0.48
Ashkenazy 1981   44  0.429  0.0140  0.0641  0.1219  0.4031  0.22
Bacha 2000   58  0.3672  0.0049  0.0564  0.0528  0.3143  0.12
Badura 1965   7  0.533  0.044  0.249  0.592  0.664  0.62
Barbosa 1983   12  0.5226  0.0015  0.1516  0.5334  0.2820  0.39
Biret 1990   45  0.4151  0.0025  0.0528  0.3465  0.0542  0.13
Blet 2003   66  0.3340  0.0072  0.0566  0.0549  0.0665  0.05
Block 1995   70  0.3179  0.0070  0.0473  0.0479  0.0478  0.04
Blumental 1952   63  0.3554  0.0065  0.0562  0.0567  0.0566  0.05
Boshniakovich 1969   8  0.5321  0.018  0.135  0.6218  0.4113  0.50
Brailowsky 1960   77  0.2889  0.0078  0.0378  0.0369  0.0481  0.03
Bunin 1987   43  0.4217  0.0143  0.0642  0.1122  0.3234  0.19
Bunin 1987b   39  0.4344  0.0036  0.0635  0.2214  0.4527  0.31
Chiu 1999   33  0.4418  0.0126  0.0630  0.292  0.5518  0.40
Cohen 1997   80  0.2668  0.0076  0.0382  0.0375  0.0385  0.03
Cortot 1951   75  0.2927  0.0061  0.0561  0.0552  0.0669  0.05
Csalog 1996   49  0.3969  0.0038  0.0636  0.1648  0.0647  0.10
Czerny 1949   3  0.5712  0.016  0.184  0.6523  0.633  0.64
Czerny 1990   13  0.5180  0.0019  0.1117  0.5142  0.2025  0.32
Duchoud 2007   55  0.3730  0.0039  0.0640  0.147  0.5828  0.28
Ezaki 2006   29  0.4529  0.0033  0.1123  0.4146  0.0736  0.17
Falvay 1989   34  0.4348  0.0050  0.0655  0.0653  0.0561  0.05
Farrell 1958   30  0.4515  0.0128  0.0627  0.3429  0.3623  0.35
Ferenczy 1958   79  0.2720  0.0186  0.0387  0.0378  0.0383  0.03
Fliere 1977   38  0.4366  0.0045  0.0546  0.1054  0.0552  0.07
Fou 1978   26  0.4652  0.0022  0.0724  0.4029  0.2824  0.33
Francois 1956   71  0.3145  0.0071  0.0470  0.0451  0.0671  0.05
Friedman 1923   87  0.2031  0.0085  0.0377  0.0374  0.0489  0.03
Friedman 1923b   84  0.2424  0.0081  0.0385  0.0367  0.0486  0.03
Friedman 1930   85  0.2475  0.0082  0.0379  0.0380  0.0382  0.03
Garcia 2007   61  0.3655  0.0042  0.0543  0.1123  0.4430  0.22
Garcia 2007b   53  0.3753  0.0035  0.0638  0.1639  0.1839  0.17
Gierzod 1998   9  0.5336  0.0016  0.1711  0.5750  0.0733  0.20
Gornostaeva 1994   41  0.4322  0.0055  0.0752  0.0757  0.0558  0.06
Groot 1988   56  0.3714  0.0154  0.1045  0.1049  0.0650  0.08
Harasiewicz 1955   19  0.4876  0.0032  0.0825  0.3846  0.0838  0.17
Hatto 1993   48  0.3981  0.0048  0.0560  0.0572  0.0479  0.04
Hatto 1997   47  0.3982  0.0044  0.0539  0.1456  0.0453  0.07
Horowitz 1949   83  0.2423  0.0084  0.0386  0.0345  0.0863  0.05
Indjic 1988   46  0.3983  0.0046  0.0558  0.0561  0.0475  0.04
Kapell 1951   16  0.5119  0.0112  0.1513  0.5526  0.4910  0.52
Kissin 1993   14  0.5125  0.0017  0.1119  0.5022  0.5112  0.50
Kushner 1989   4  0.5613  0.013  0.233  0.6620  0.467  0.55
Luisada 1991   54  0.3787  0.0067  0.0472  0.0466  0.0472  0.04
Lushtak 2004   40  0.4339  0.0037  0.0734  0.2357  0.0545  0.11
Malcuzynski 1961   10  0.525  0.039  0.1210  0.5820  0.499  0.53
Magaloff 1978   22  0.4732  0.0031  0.0731  0.2936  0.2629  0.27
Magin 1975   24  0.4756  0.0023  0.0822  0.4128  0.3521  0.38
Michalowski 1933   76  0.2890  0.0063  0.0653  0.069  0.5235  0.18
Milkina 1970   2  0.622  0.192  0.542  0.784  0.671  0.72
Mohovich 1999   50  0.3860  0.0047  0.0559  0.0551  0.0567  0.05
Moravec 1969   52  0.3877  0.0058  0.0654  0.0671  0.0459  0.05
Morozova 2008   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Neighaus 1950   59  0.3646  0.0068  0.0565  0.0539  0.1351  0.08
Niedzielski 1931   88  0.1370  0.0088  0.0288  0.0288  0.0290  0.02
Ohlsson 1999   28  0.4657  0.0021  0.1321  0.4414  0.5016  0.47
Osinska 1989   11  0.526  0.025  0.157  0.6036  0.4211  0.50
Pachmann 1927   73  0.3062  0.0069  0.0475  0.0446  0.0664  0.05
Paderewski 1930   86  0.2388  0.0077  0.0376  0.0355  0.0574  0.04
Perlemuter 1992   72  0.3149  0.0079  0.0381  0.0374  0.0380  0.03
Pierdomenico 2008   64  0.3473  0.0062  0.0563  0.0533  0.3341  0.13
Poblocka 1999   21  0.4734  0.0024  0.0729  0.3250  0.0937  0.17
Rabcewiczowa 1932   35  0.4364  0.0030  0.0633  0.2561  0.0446  0.10
Rachmaninoff 1923   74  0.2984  0.0073  0.0569  0.0561  0.0560  0.05
Rangell 2001   27  0.4616  0.0127  0.0626  0.3612  0.5317  0.44
Richter 1976   5  0.5311  0.0114  0.176  0.616  0.692  0.65
Rosen 1989   51  0.3871  0.0056  0.0848  0.0863  0.0457  0.06
Rosenthal 1930   82  0.2450  0.0087  0.0380  0.0373  0.0384  0.03
Rosenthal 1931   69  0.3285  0.0075  0.0567  0.0566  0.0476  0.04
Rosenthal 1931b   81  0.2565  0.0083  0.0384  0.0378  0.0488  0.03
Rosenthal 1931c   68  0.3258  0.0074  0.0474  0.0458  0.0670  0.05
Rosenthal 1931d   78  0.2874  0.0080  0.0383  0.0368  0.0487  0.03
Rossi 2007   62  0.3543  0.0060  0.0568  0.0540  0.1248  0.08
Rubinstein 1939   15  0.5133  0.0013  0.1312  0.5614  0.528  0.54
Rubinstein 1952   23  0.4737  0.0018  0.1218  0.5040  0.2026  0.32
Rubinstein 1966   6  0.5359  0.0011  0.158  0.5933  0.4114  0.49
Schilhawsky 1960   31  0.447  0.0234  0.0637  0.1637  0.2532  0.20
Shebanova 2002   32  0.4428  0.0041  0.0544  0.1042  0.1544  0.12
Smith 1975   67  0.3391  0.0066  0.0557  0.0566  0.0473  0.04
Sokolov 2002   42  0.4235  0.0052  0.0751  0.0736  0.3240  0.15
Sztompka 1959   17  0.508  0.0229  0.0732  0.2726  0.4722  0.36
Tomsic 1995   18  0.484  0.037  0.1214  0.5510  0.576  0.56
Uninsky 1932   20  0.4742  0.0020  0.1120  0.497  0.675  0.57
Uninsky 1971   36  0.4363  0.0053  0.0847  0.0865  0.0556  0.06
Wasowski 1980   37  0.4361  0.0051  0.0750  0.0753  0.0654  0.06
Zak 1937   60  0.3647  0.0059  0.0656  0.0665  0.0462  0.05
Zak 1951   57  0.3710  0.0157  0.0749  0.0747  0.0655  0.06
Average   1  0.641  0.481  0.471  0.8042  0.2019  0.40
Random 1   91  -0.0778  0.0091  0.0191  0.0155  0.0491  0.02
Random 2   89  0.0367  0.0090  0.0190  0.0137  0.1577  0.04
Random 3   90  -0.0386  0.0089  0.0189  0.0131  0.2168  0.05

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).