Goldenweiser 1946

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   54  0.5722  0.0124  0.0923  0.2536  0.0630  0.12
Ax 1995   31  0.6417  0.0126  0.0920  0.2512  0.399  0.31
Bacha 1998   60  0.5263  0.0058  0.0456  0.0448  0.0559  0.04
Barbosa 1983   33  0.6321  0.0125  0.1019  0.2520  0.3310  0.29
BenOr 1989   16  0.6714  0.0222  0.0821  0.2540  0.0725  0.13
Biret 1990   48  0.6133  0.0046  0.0643  0.0655  0.0555  0.05
Brailowsky 1960   59  0.5238  0.0056  0.0460  0.0451  0.0457  0.04
Chiu 1999   52  0.5824  0.0129  0.0629  0.1330  0.1228  0.12
Clidat 1994   58  0.5343  0.0057  0.0458  0.0454  0.0460  0.04
Cohen 1997   63  0.3359  0.0063  0.0363  0.0360  0.0465  0.03
Cortot 1951   53  0.5736  0.0059  0.0550  0.0548  0.0463  0.04
Csalog 1996   13  0.696  0.059  0.105  0.4822  0.337  0.40
Czerny 1989   6  0.708  0.0313  0.128  0.4618  0.444  0.45
Ezaki 2006   44  0.6126  0.0145  0.0545  0.0517  0.3026  0.12
Falvay 1989   37  0.6315  0.0231  0.0631  0.1161  0.0440  0.07
Fiorentino 1962   49  0.6037  0.0054  0.0459  0.0460  0.0462  0.04
Fliere 1977   43  0.6242  0.0047  0.0734  0.0745  0.0643  0.06
Fou 1978   17  0.675  0.074  0.153  0.5116  0.346  0.42
Francois 1956   47  0.6131  0.0048  0.0733  0.0720  0.2723  0.14
Goldenweiser 1946   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Gornostaeva 1994   30  0.6434  0.0041  0.0735  0.0733  0.1038  0.08
Groot 1988   21  0.6628  0.0127  0.0822  0.2547  0.0631  0.12
Hatto 1993   29  0.6446  0.0018  0.0728  0.1451  0.0539  0.08
Hatto 1997   24  0.654  0.097  0.0925  0.2236  0.0824  0.13
Horszowski 1983   36  0.6320  0.0117  0.0824  0.2523  0.2312  0.24
Indjic 2001   22  0.6616  0.0210  0.0926  0.1945  0.0729  0.12
Katin 1996   50  0.6060  0.0051  0.0642  0.0657  0.0449  0.05
Kiepura 1999   55  0.5556  0.0055  0.0462  0.0454  0.0456  0.04
Korecka 1992   23  0.6639  0.0043  0.0551  0.0544  0.0744  0.06
Kushner 1990   41  0.6261  0.0038  0.0457  0.0433  0.1045  0.06
Lilamand 2001   8  0.702  0.143  0.216  0.466  0.542  0.50
Luisada 1990   19  0.6711  0.026  0.1414  0.3539  0.0716  0.16
Luisada 2008   40  0.6254  0.0036  0.0736  0.0755  0.0546  0.06
Lushtak 2004   32  0.6453  0.0040  0.0544  0.0545  0.0552  0.05
Malcuzynski 1951   3  0.703  0.132  0.187  0.467  0.483  0.47
Malcuzynski 1961   9  0.6910  0.035  0.132  0.5130  0.1411  0.27
Magaloff 1977   18  0.6740  0.0023  0.0715  0.3326  0.298  0.31
Magin 1975   15  0.6855  0.0011  0.099  0.4547  0.0614  0.16
Meguri 1997   26  0.6535  0.0034  0.0553  0.0525  0.2033  0.10
Milkina 1970   10  0.6925  0.0121  0.0718  0.2632  0.0920  0.15
Mohovich 1999   42  0.6229  0.0035  0.0549  0.0547  0.0553  0.05
Nezu 2005   25  0.6530  0.0030  0.0630  0.1140  0.0636  0.08
Ohlsson 1999   39  0.6250  0.0037  0.0548  0.0552  0.0550  0.05
Olejniczak 1990   14  0.6851  0.0028  0.0727  0.1742  0.0635  0.10
Osinska 1989   4  0.7048  0.0012  0.0911  0.4347  0.0517  0.15
Perlemuter 1992   35  0.6362  0.0049  0.0547  0.0513  0.2827  0.12
Poblocka 1999   2  0.719  0.0314  0.0912  0.4044  0.0618  0.15
Rangell 2001   45  0.6147  0.0050  0.0737  0.0730  0.1534  0.10
Richter 1960   57  0.5345  0.0061  0.0641  0.0661  0.0451  0.05
Richter 1961   62  0.4141  0.0062  0.0455  0.0451  0.0558  0.04
Rosen 1989   27  0.6557  0.0032  0.0532  0.1039  0.0637  0.08
Rubinstein 1939   38  0.6365  0.0044  0.0638  0.0653  0.0548  0.05
Rubinstein 1952   1  0.731  0.141  0.141  0.6116  0.325  0.44
Rubinstein 1966   11  0.6927  0.0115  0.1010  0.4533  0.0813  0.19
Rudanovskaya 2007   51  0.5818  0.0153  0.0461  0.0446  0.0561  0.04
Shebanova 2002   5  0.7019  0.0120  0.0813  0.3743  0.0715  0.16
Smith 1975   34  0.6332  0.0033  0.0546  0.0518  0.4319  0.15
Sztompka 1959   12  0.697  0.048  0.104  0.506  0.601  0.55
Tanyel 1992   46  0.6149  0.0042  0.0639  0.0623  0.3422  0.14
Tsujii 2005   7  0.7023  0.0119  0.0616  0.3047  0.0432  0.11
Uninsky 1959   20  0.6613  0.0216  0.0717  0.2934  0.0721  0.14
Vardi 1988   56  0.5312  0.0252  0.0454  0.0430  0.1241  0.07
Wasowski 1980   28  0.6558  0.0039  0.0552  0.0545  0.0647  0.05
Zimerman 1975   61  0.5044  0.0060  0.0640  0.0654  0.0454  0.05
Random 1   66  -0.0264  0.0065  0.0265  0.0241  0.0464  0.03
Random 2   65  -0.0166  0.0066  0.0166  0.0148  0.0366  0.02
Random 3   64  0.0552  0.0064  0.0364  0.0327  0.1842  0.07

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).