Rosen 1989

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   19  0.6642  0.0029  0.0729  0.1751  0.0434  0.08
Ashkenazy 1981   17  0.6610  0.0219  0.1116  0.3751  0.0519  0.14
Beliavsky 2004   34  0.6360  0.0035  0.0735  0.0762  0.0347  0.05
BenOr 1989   8  0.6815  0.0117  0.1212  0.4662  0.0324  0.12
Biret 1990   22  0.6545  0.0030  0.0632  0.1262  0.0435  0.07
Blet 2003   38  0.6252  0.0048  0.0548  0.0538  0.0651  0.05
Block 1995   40  0.6128  0.0053  0.0642  0.0636  0.0641  0.06
Brailowsky 1960   21  0.6534  0.0011  0.1111  0.4725  0.247  0.34
Chiu 1999   35  0.6339  0.0041  0.0546  0.0559  0.0457  0.04
Clidat 1994   15  0.678  0.0210  0.098  0.4929  0.1510  0.27
Cohen 1997   9  0.6833  0.0024  0.0626  0.2241  0.0628  0.11
Coop 1987   37  0.6220  0.0052  0.0641  0.0659  0.0548  0.05
Cortot 1951   31  0.6365  0.0038  0.0736  0.0762  0.0353  0.05
Czerny 1949   51  0.5964  0.0056  0.0361  0.0355  0.0660  0.04
Czerny 1949b   45  0.5937  0.0046  0.0555  0.0556  0.0544  0.05
Ezaki 2006   29  0.6424  0.0044  0.0552  0.0547  0.0736  0.06
Falvay 1989   13  0.6713  0.0113  0.1413  0.4645  0.0615  0.17
Ferenczy 1958   27  0.6449  0.0033  0.0637  0.0622  0.2822  0.13
Fiorentino 1962   25  0.6435  0.0034  0.0834  0.0852  0.0542  0.06
Fliere 1977   3  0.717  0.034  0.142  0.5853  0.0514  0.17
Fou 1978   48  0.5953  0.0042  0.0638  0.0656  0.0445  0.05
Francois 1956   53  0.585  0.0412  0.1119  0.336  0.663  0.47
Hatto 1997   5  0.7016  0.0115  0.1214  0.4435  0.0813  0.19
Horowitz 1971   30  0.6414  0.0114  0.1115  0.3917  0.316  0.35
Horowitz 1985   59  0.5426  0.0043  0.0644  0.0644  0.0737  0.06
Indjic 2001   6  0.6958  0.0018  0.1017  0.3541  0.0716  0.16
Kapell 1951   47  0.5931  0.0050  0.0639  0.0651  0.0546  0.05
Kiepura 1999   36  0.6343  0.0051  0.0550  0.0557  0.0454  0.04
Kilenyi 1937   57  0.5644  0.0058  0.0457  0.0455  0.0459  0.04
Kissin 1993   42  0.6136  0.0028  0.0628  0.1943  0.0626  0.11
Kitain 1937   60  0.5421  0.0047  0.0547  0.0528  0.2231  0.10
Kushner 1990   50  0.5930  0.0045  0.0553  0.0550  0.0550  0.05
Levy 1951   23  0.6519  0.0023  0.0727  0.2050  0.0529  0.10
Luisada 1990   43  0.6159  0.0054  0.0549  0.0557  0.0552  0.05
Lushtak 2004   20  0.6529  0.0031  0.0630  0.1551  0.0532  0.09
Lympany 1968   56  0.5661  0.0057  0.0460  0.0460  0.0455  0.04
Magaloff 1977   14  0.6723  0.009  0.139  0.4832  0.1211  0.24
Magaloff 1977b   12  0.673  0.173  0.167  0.5230  0.159  0.28
Magin 1975   49  0.5932  0.0059  0.0458  0.0457  0.0558  0.04
Milkina 1970   1  0.731  0.311  0.303  0.567  0.492  0.52
Mohovich 1999   32  0.6322  0.0025  0.0720  0.3235  0.0618  0.14
Nadelmann 1956   24  0.6411  0.0116  0.0921  0.3059  0.0427  0.11
Ohlsson 1999   41  0.6125  0.0036  0.0645  0.0652  0.0449  0.05
Olejniczac 1990   28  0.6417  0.0140  0.0833  0.0860  0.0440  0.06
Olejniczak 1991   46  0.5962  0.0055  0.0556  0.0551  0.0643  0.05
Osinska 1989   4  0.709  0.026  0.134  0.5644  0.0712  0.20
Paderewski 1912   52  0.5946  0.0026  0.0725  0.2455  0.0430  0.10
Perahia 1994   54  0.5851  0.0037  0.0551  0.0551  0.0462  0.04
Perlemuter 1986   39  0.6240  0.0027  0.0724  0.2411  0.505  0.35
Poblocka 1999   26  0.6427  0.0039  0.0640  0.0645  0.0639  0.06
Rangell 2001   58  0.5547  0.0061  0.0459  0.0459  0.0563  0.04
Risler 1920   62  0.4641  0.0060  0.0363  0.0352  0.0556  0.04
Rosen 1989   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Rubinstein 1939   10  0.6848  0.007  0.1210  0.4714  0.374  0.42
Rubinstein 1952   7  0.694  0.045  0.155  0.5528  0.188  0.31
Rubinstein 1966   2  0.722  0.192  0.411  0.688  0.501  0.58
Rummel 1943   55  0.5654  0.0049  0.0554  0.0557  0.0461  0.04
Shebanova 2002   44  0.6038  0.0032  0.0631  0.1250  0.0533  0.08
Smith 1975   11  0.6750  0.008  0.186  0.5356  0.0417  0.15
Szpilman 1948   61  0.5056  0.0062  0.0643  0.0645  0.0638  0.06
Uninsky 1971   33  0.6318  0.0122  0.0823  0.2844  0.0621  0.13
Wasowski 1980   16  0.6712  0.0121  0.1422  0.2959  0.0425  0.11
Weissenberg 1971   18  0.666  0.0320  0.1118  0.3557  0.0520  0.13
Random 1    63  0.0457  0.0063  0.0362  0.038  0.5223  0.12
Random 2   64  0.0055  0.0064  0.0264  0.0258  0.0364  0.02
Random 3   65  -0.0363  0.0065  0.0265  0.0258  0.0365  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).