Shebanova 2002

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   36  0.7259  0.0021  0.0821  0.3326  0.2825  0.30
Ax 1995   59  0.5964  0.0059  0.0557  0.0560  0.0362  0.04
Bacha 1998   40  0.7246  0.0032  0.0732  0.1331  0.1839  0.15
Barbosa 1983   55  0.6731  0.0034  0.0936  0.0914  0.4830  0.21
BenOr 1989   20  0.7757  0.0020  0.0720  0.347  0.5817  0.44
Biret 1990   16  0.7830  0.0023  0.0918  0.3719  0.3323  0.35
Brailowsky 1960   54  0.6756  0.0047  0.0460  0.0426  0.1853  0.08
Chiu 1999   33  0.7333  0.0035  0.1033  0.102  0.4827  0.22
Clidat 1994   37  0.7235  0.0028  0.0925  0.2613  0.5520  0.38
Cohen 1997   63  0.4966  0.0063  0.0559  0.0552  0.0461  0.04
Cortot 1951   57  0.6329  0.0057  0.0556  0.0546  0.0463  0.04
Csalog 1996   12  0.7810  0.0213  0.1415  0.503  0.5214  0.51
Czerny 1989   41  0.7115  0.0145  0.0747  0.0728  0.2643  0.13
Ezaki 2006   48  0.697  0.0353  0.0651  0.0626  0.2248  0.11
Falvay 1989   4  0.811  0.221  0.225  0.599  0.4913  0.54
Fiorentino 1962   25  0.7518  0.0140  0.0840  0.0845  0.0656  0.07
Fliere 1977   32  0.7465  0.0044  0.0934  0.0938  0.0752  0.08
Fou 1978   38  0.7239  0.0031  0.0731  0.1424  0.2232  0.18
Francois 1956   60  0.5832  0.0061  0.0462  0.0452  0.0464  0.04
Goldenweiser 1946   45  0.7025  0.0042  0.0743  0.0713  0.3738  0.16
Gornostaeva 1994   43  0.7037  0.0049  0.0650  0.0632  0.1651  0.10
Groot 1988   3  0.814  0.1011  0.192  0.636  0.5010  0.56
Hatto 1993   8  0.8043  0.009  0.159  0.579  0.597  0.58
Hatto 1997   7  0.8111  0.024  0.163  0.606  0.592  0.59
Horszowski 1983   52  0.6842  0.0027  0.0727  0.2217  0.3126  0.26
Indjic 2001   5  0.8126  0.006  0.144  0.596  0.594  0.59
Katin 1996   9  0.809  0.0312  0.2411  0.555  0.625  0.58
Kiepura 1999   62  0.5645  0.0060  0.0463  0.0444  0.0559  0.04
Korecka 1992   44  0.7051  0.0052  0.0746  0.0734  0.0954  0.08
Kushner 1990   51  0.6847  0.0033  0.0935  0.0910  0.5528  0.22
Lilamand 2001   56  0.6562  0.0050  0.0653  0.0617  0.3240  0.14
Luisada 1990   28  0.7548  0.0030  0.0829  0.2135  0.0844  0.13
Luisada 2008   27  0.7550  0.0036  0.0838  0.0827  0.1649  0.11
Lushtak 2004   23  0.7628  0.0039  0.0748  0.0728  0.2046  0.12
Malcuzynski 1951   53  0.6753  0.0041  0.0744  0.076  0.4835  0.18
Malcuzynski 1961   21  0.776  0.038  0.198  0.574  0.5411  0.55
Magaloff 1977   13  0.7821  0.0116  0.0917  0.408  0.5515  0.47
Magin 1975   18  0.7716  0.0117  0.1216  0.4212  0.4119  0.41
Meguri 1997   34  0.7341  0.0046  0.0742  0.0714  0.4634  0.18
Milkina 1970   22  0.7619  0.0118  0.0819  0.375  0.5316  0.44
Mohovich 1999   31  0.7554  0.0037  0.0841  0.0823  0.2541  0.14
Nezu 2005   30  0.7523  0.0124  0.0923  0.329  0.4521  0.38
Ohlsson 1999   2  0.815  0.085  0.176  0.595  0.576  0.58
Olejniczak 1990   24  0.7649  0.0038  0.0654  0.0625  0.2347  0.12
Osinska 1989   19  0.7714  0.0126  0.0726  0.2538  0.0742  0.13
Perlemuter 1992   42  0.7138  0.0048  0.0652  0.064  0.5036  0.17
Poblocka 1999   15  0.7860  0.0029  0.0728  0.2129  0.1931  0.20
Rangell 2001   50  0.6852  0.0055  0.0839  0.0817  0.3537  0.17
Richter 1960   46  0.7017  0.0154  0.0745  0.0743  0.0557  0.06
Richter 1961   61  0.5744  0.0062  0.0461  0.0456  0.0460  0.04
Rosen 1989   17  0.783  0.133  0.1514  0.503  0.639  0.56
Rubinstein 1939   26  0.7527  0.0022  0.0922  0.3316  0.3922  0.36
Rubinstein 1952   6  0.812  0.152  0.161  0.633  0.641  0.63
Rubinstein 1966   10  0.7913  0.0115  0.1012  0.5223  0.2124  0.33
Rudanovskaya 2007   47  0.6934  0.0058  0.0649  0.0628  0.1650  0.10
Shebanova 2002   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Smith 1975   29  0.7536  0.0019  0.0924  0.293  0.6018  0.42
Sztompka 1959   39  0.7258  0.0043  0.0837  0.0812  0.4233  0.18
Tanyel 1992   49  0.6940  0.0051  0.0655  0.0625  0.2945  0.13
Tsujii 2005   1  0.818  0.0310  0.187  0.583  0.603  0.59
Uninsky 1959   11  0.7920  0.017  0.1510  0.574  0.578  0.57
Vardi 1988   58  0.6124  0.0056  0.0558  0.0543  0.0558  0.05
Wasowski 1980   14  0.7822  0.0114  0.1513  0.517  0.5712  0.54
Zimerman 1975   35  0.7212  0.0125  0.0830  0.1826  0.2829  0.22
Random 1   66  -0.0161  0.0065  0.0265  0.0236  0.0465  0.03
Random 2   65  0.0163  0.0066  0.0166  0.0141  0.0566  0.02
Random 3   64  0.0555  0.0064  0.0364  0.0330  0.1555  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).