Rosen 1989

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   20  0.6640  0.0030  0.0630  0.1552  0.0433  0.08
Ashkenazy 1981   18  0.6615  0.0020  0.1116  0.3652  0.0522  0.13
Beliavsky 2004   35  0.6360  0.0036  0.0735  0.0763  0.0345  0.05
BenOr 1989   9  0.6813  0.0118  0.1214  0.4463  0.0327  0.11
Biret 1990   23  0.6554  0.0031  0.0631  0.1163  0.0435  0.07
Blet 2003   39  0.6255  0.0049  0.0549  0.0538  0.0648  0.05
Block 1995   41  0.6125  0.0054  0.0543  0.0537  0.0652  0.05
Brailowsky 1960   22  0.6531  0.0012  0.1011  0.4626  0.235  0.33
Chiu 1999   36  0.6346  0.0042  0.0547  0.0560  0.0457  0.04
Clidat 1994   16  0.677  0.0211  0.099  0.4729  0.159  0.27
Cohen 1997   10  0.6829  0.0025  0.0627  0.2042  0.0529  0.10
Coop 1987   38  0.6238  0.0053  0.0642  0.0660  0.0546  0.05
Cortot 1951   32  0.6366  0.0039  0.0736  0.0763  0.0353  0.05
Czerny 1949   52  0.5965  0.0057  0.0362  0.0356  0.0561  0.04
Czerny 1949b   46  0.5932  0.0047  0.0556  0.0557  0.0542  0.05
Ezaki 2006   30  0.6421  0.0045  0.0553  0.0548  0.0736  0.06
Falvay 1989   14  0.6720  0.0014  0.1413  0.4545  0.0516  0.15
Ferenczy 1958   28  0.6449  0.0034  0.0637  0.0622  0.2820  0.13
Fiorentino 1962   26  0.6434  0.0035  0.0734  0.0753  0.0538  0.06
Fliere 1977   4  0.718  0.015  0.133  0.5754  0.0415  0.15
Fou 1978   49  0.5950  0.0043  0.0638  0.0657  0.0443  0.05
Francois 1956   54  0.585  0.0413  0.1119  0.337  0.653  0.46
Hatto 1997   6  0.7011  0.0116  0.1215  0.4135  0.0714  0.17
Horowitz 1971   31  0.6410  0.0115  0.1117  0.3618  0.306  0.33
Horowitz 1985   60  0.5424  0.0044  0.0545  0.0545  0.0639  0.05
Indjic 2001   7  0.6963  0.0019  0.1020  0.3242  0.0718  0.15
Kapell 1951   48  0.5928  0.0051  0.0639  0.0652  0.0544  0.05
Kiepura 1999   37  0.6341  0.0052  0.0551  0.0558  0.0454  0.04
Kilenyi 1937   58  0.5645  0.0059  0.0458  0.0456  0.0460  0.04
Kissin 1993   43  0.6133  0.0029  0.0629  0.1544  0.0631  0.09
Kitain 1937   61  0.5418  0.0048  0.0548  0.0529  0.1930  0.10
Kushner 1990   51  0.5927  0.0046  0.0554  0.0551  0.0547  0.05
Levy 1951   24  0.6516  0.0024  0.0728  0.1951  0.0528  0.10
Luisada 1990   44  0.6159  0.0055  0.0550  0.0558  0.0551  0.05
Lushtak 2004   21  0.6537  0.0032  0.0632  0.1152  0.0534  0.07
Lympany 1968   57  0.5661  0.0058  0.0461  0.0461  0.0455  0.04
Magaloff 1977   15  0.6723  0.0010  0.1212  0.4532  0.1211  0.23
Magaloff 1977b   13  0.673  0.104  0.168  0.5031  0.1510  0.27
Magin 1975   50  0.5930  0.0060  0.0459  0.0458  0.0558  0.04
Milkina 1970   2  0.732  0.272  0.304  0.568  0.492  0.52
Mohovich 1999   33  0.6319  0.0026  0.0723  0.2736  0.0621  0.13
Nadelmann 1956   25  0.6426  0.0017  0.0921  0.3060  0.0425  0.11
Ohlsson 1999   42  0.6122  0.0037  0.0546  0.0553  0.0459  0.04
Olejniczac 1990   29  0.6412  0.0141  0.0733  0.0761  0.0450  0.05
Olejniczak 1991   47  0.5962  0.0056  0.0557  0.0552  0.0641  0.05
Osinska 1989   5  0.7014  0.017  0.136  0.5445  0.0713  0.19
Paderewski 1912   53  0.5947  0.0027  0.0725  0.2156  0.0432  0.09
Perahia 1994   55  0.5851  0.0038  0.0552  0.0552  0.0463  0.04
Perlemuter 1986   40  0.6242  0.0028  0.0726  0.2012  0.497  0.31
Poblocka 1999   27  0.6452  0.0040  0.0640  0.0646  0.0637  0.06
Rangell 2001   59  0.5543  0.0062  0.0460  0.0460  0.0564  0.04
Risler 1920   63  0.4639  0.0061  0.0364  0.0353  0.0556  0.04
Rosen 1989   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Rubinstein 1939   11  0.6844  0.008  0.1210  0.4714  0.364  0.41
Rubinstein 1952   8  0.6917  0.006  0.155  0.5528  0.188  0.31
Rubinstein 1966   3  0.724  0.063  0.402  0.689  0.501  0.58
Rummel 1943   56  0.5653  0.0050  0.0555  0.0558  0.0462  0.04
Shebanova 2002   45  0.6036  0.0033  0.0641  0.0650  0.0549  0.05
Smith 1975   12  0.6748  0.009  0.187  0.5357  0.0417  0.15
Szpilman 1948   62  0.5057  0.0063  0.0544  0.0546  0.0640  0.05
Uninsky 1971   34  0.6335  0.0023  0.0824  0.2545  0.0526  0.11
Wasowski 1980   17  0.679  0.0122  0.1422  0.2960  0.0424  0.11
Weissenberg 1971   19  0.666  0.0321  0.1118  0.3558  0.0519  0.13
Average   1  0.771  0.351  0.341  0.8555  0.0512  0.21
Random 1    64  0.0458  0.0064  0.0363  0.038  0.5223  0.12
Random 2   65  0.0056  0.0065  0.0265  0.0259  0.0265  0.02
Random 3   66  -0.0364  0.0066  0.0166  0.0158  0.0366  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).