Chiu 1999

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   17  0.5812  0.0127  0.0522  0.2958  0.0532  0.12
Anderszewski 2003   24  0.5620  0.0136  0.0531  0.1848  0.0543  0.09
Ashkenazy 1981   25  0.5588  0.0045  0.0545  0.1052  0.0648  0.08
Bacha 2000   32  0.535  0.0225  0.0634  0.1730  0.2315  0.20
Badura 1965   39  0.5238  0.0056  0.0561  0.0550  0.0755  0.06
Barbosa 1983   5  0.612  0.052  0.164  0.528  0.581  0.55
Biret 1990   14  0.5833  0.0031  0.0723  0.2846  0.0630  0.13
Blet 2003   69  0.4189  0.0078  0.0472  0.0470  0.0383  0.03
Block 1995   48  0.5041  0.0035  0.0537  0.1536  0.1918  0.17
Blumental 1952   6  0.616  0.024  0.1513  0.3836  0.178  0.25
Boshniakovich 1969   64  0.4485  0.0060  0.0470  0.0472  0.0469  0.04
Brailowsky 1960   42  0.5249  0.0053  0.0551  0.0541  0.2236  0.10
Bunin 1987   79  0.3540  0.0075  0.0560  0.0558  0.0560  0.05
Bunin 1987b   80  0.3563  0.0068  0.0469  0.0444  0.1352  0.07
Chiu 1999   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Cohen 1997   41  0.5268  0.0071  0.0463  0.0422  0.3035  0.11
Cortot 1951   75  0.3755  0.0081  0.0378  0.0381  0.0389  0.03
Csalog 1996   73  0.4018  0.0122  0.0529  0.2230  0.2512  0.23
Czerny 1949   61  0.4490  0.0069  0.0376  0.0371  0.0485  0.03
Czerny 1990   12  0.5939  0.0032  0.0916  0.3560  0.0529  0.13
Duchoud 2007   57  0.468  0.0237  0.0540  0.1313  0.4013  0.23
Ezaki 2006   2  0.643  0.043  0.135  0.5234  0.282  0.38
Falvay 1989   19  0.5710  0.029  0.0924  0.2731  0.324  0.29
Farrell 1958   26  0.5587  0.0046  0.0648  0.0650  0.0753  0.06
Ferenczy 1958   43  0.517  0.0224  0.0539  0.1427  0.3614  0.22
Fliere 1977   20  0.5759  0.0018  0.069  0.4065  0.0427  0.13
Fou 1978   22  0.5626  0.0139  0.0433  0.1751  0.0541  0.09
Francois 1956   68  0.4237  0.0076  0.0464  0.0468  0.0473  0.04
Friedman 1923   27  0.5421  0.0154  0.0558  0.0551  0.0663  0.05
Friedman 1923b   30  0.5442  0.0055  0.0650  0.0650  0.0656  0.06
Friedman 1930   18  0.5823  0.0148  0.0746  0.0737  0.2823  0.14
Garcia 2007   56  0.4657  0.0063  0.0380  0.0366  0.0486  0.03
Garcia 2007b   52  0.4927  0.0050  0.0553  0.0588  0.0374  0.04
Gierzod 1998   40  0.5234  0.0023  0.0625  0.2781  0.0344  0.09
Gornostaeva 1994   63  0.4460  0.0057  0.0557  0.0583  0.0370  0.04
Groot 1988   47  0.5028  0.006  0.0710  0.4026  0.273  0.33
Harasiewicz 1955   7  0.6119  0.0128  0.0630  0.1975  0.0445  0.09
Hatto 1993   10  0.6077  0.0020  0.0620  0.3450  0.0626  0.14
Hatto 1997   3  0.629  0.0213  0.0612  0.3856  0.0524  0.14
Horowitz 1949   72  0.4061  0.0079  0.0386  0.0361  0.0666  0.04
Indjic 1988   4  0.6164  0.0017  0.0714  0.3758  0.0522  0.14
Kapell 1951   55  0.4729  0.008  0.0915  0.3649  0.0719  0.16
Kissin 1993   53  0.4882  0.0058  0.0649  0.0674  0.0459  0.05
Kushner 1989   36  0.5246  0.0047  0.0747  0.0773  0.0358  0.05
Luisada 1991   16  0.5865  0.0029  0.0727  0.2656  0.0631  0.12
Lushtak 2004   9  0.6030  0.0030  0.0626  0.2659  0.0534  0.11
Malcuzynski 1961   81  0.3358  0.0062  0.0473  0.0479  0.0378  0.03
Magaloff 1978   46  0.5115  0.0143  0.0643  0.1139  0.1628  0.13
Magin 1975   49  0.4932  0.0015  0.067  0.4244  0.149  0.24
Michalowski 1933   83  0.3169  0.0080  0.0388  0.0375  0.0381  0.03
Milkina 1970   44  0.5151  0.0041  0.0635  0.1671  0.0542  0.09
Mohovich 1999   38  0.5243  0.0033  0.0828  0.2259  0.0537  0.10
Moravec 1969   60  0.4562  0.0051  0.0552  0.0541  0.1739  0.09
Morozova 2008   15  0.5831  0.0016  0.0618  0.3540  0.226  0.28
Neighaus 1950   54  0.4735  0.0059  0.0559  0.0565  0.0562  0.05
Niedzielski 1931   70  0.4191  0.0073  0.0562  0.0577  0.0365  0.04
Ohlsson 1999   34  0.5325  0.0119  0.0621  0.3167  0.0433  0.11
Osinska 1989   28  0.5475  0.0044  0.0544  0.1174  0.0449  0.07
Pachmann 1927   74  0.3952  0.0083  0.0377  0.0352  0.0567  0.04
Paderewski 1930   76  0.3766  0.0082  0.0466  0.0482  0.0380  0.03
Perlemuter 1992   33  0.5353  0.0065  0.0382  0.0357  0.0475  0.03
Pierdomenico 2008   78  0.3686  0.0074  0.0555  0.0552  0.0657  0.05
Poblocka 1999   66  0.4336  0.0038  0.0541  0.1271  0.0450  0.07
Rabcewiczowa 1932   35  0.5248  0.007  0.0819  0.3441  0.1511  0.23
Rachmaninoff 1923   37  0.5244  0.0042  0.0538  0.1467  0.0451  0.07
Rangell 2001   82  0.3276  0.0070  0.0467  0.0447  0.0661  0.05
Richter 1976   77  0.3756  0.0077  0.0379  0.0376  0.0479  0.03
Rosen 1989   31  0.5311  0.0114  0.068  0.4169  0.0525  0.14
Rosenthal 1930   85  0.2780  0.0086  0.0387  0.0381  0.0387  0.03
Rosenthal 1931   88  0.2572  0.0087  0.0383  0.0363  0.0482  0.03
Rosenthal 1931b   87  0.2683  0.0088  0.0468  0.0470  0.0471  0.04
Rosenthal 1931c   86  0.2778  0.0084  0.0381  0.0355  0.0572  0.04
Rosenthal 1931d   84  0.2779  0.0085  0.0375  0.0366  0.0488  0.03
Rossi 2007   29  0.5424  0.0161  0.0471  0.0440  0.2140  0.09
Rubinstein 1939   51  0.4950  0.0064  0.0385  0.0365  0.0477  0.03
Rubinstein 1952   59  0.4573  0.0040  0.0532  0.1742  0.1521  0.16
Rubinstein 1966   8  0.604  0.0310  0.0817  0.3538  0.235  0.28
Schilhawsky 1960   65  0.4345  0.0066  0.0384  0.0378  0.0384  0.03
Shebanova 2002   21  0.5714  0.015  0.102  0.5445  0.1110  0.24
Smith 1975   50  0.4974  0.0049  0.0556  0.0572  0.0464  0.04
Sokolov 2002   71  0.4154  0.0067  0.0374  0.0369  0.0376  0.03
Sztompka 1959   45  0.5170  0.0026  0.0536  0.1678  0.0446  0.08
Tomsic 1995   67  0.4222  0.0152  0.0554  0.0551  0.0754  0.06
Uninsky 1932   58  0.4681  0.0072  0.0465  0.0463  0.0468  0.04
Uninsky 1971   62  0.4416  0.0134  0.0542  0.1270  0.0547  0.08
Wasowski 1980   23  0.5617  0.0121  0.0511  0.4043  0.187  0.27
Zak 1937   11  0.5947  0.0012  0.126  0.5064  0.0520  0.16
Zak 1951   13  0.5813  0.0111  0.083  0.5248  0.0716  0.19
Average   1  0.701  0.541  0.531  0.7662  0.0517  0.19
Random 1   91  -0.1684  0.0091  0.0191  0.0174  0.0291  0.01
Random 2   90  -0.0471  0.0090  0.0190  0.0161  0.0490  0.02
Random 3   89  -0.0367  0.0089  0.0289  0.024  0.5438  0.10

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).