Bacha 1998

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   25  0.8132  0.0025  0.0925  0.3642  0.0534  0.13
Ax 1995   44  0.7454  0.0041  0.0363  0.0329  0.1152  0.06
Bacha 1998   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Barbosa 1983   55  0.7028  0.0044  0.0455  0.0432  0.1246  0.07
BenOr 1989   43  0.7456  0.0053  0.0453  0.0440  0.0655  0.05
Biret 1990   1  0.884  0.102  0.281  0.658  0.521  0.58
Brailowsky 1960   22  0.8238  0.0026  0.0928  0.3214  0.3923  0.35
Chiu 1999   49  0.7246  0.0057  0.0640  0.0620  0.2236  0.11
Clidat 1994   14  0.8319  0.0114  0.109  0.4811  0.563  0.52
Cohen 1997   53  0.7139  0.0046  0.0642  0.0610  0.4627  0.17
Cortot 1951   45  0.7423  0.0043  0.0546  0.059  0.3931  0.14
Csalog 1996   46  0.7424  0.0055  0.0543  0.0529  0.1442  0.08
Czerny 1989   47  0.7365  0.0042  0.0452  0.0438  0.0654  0.05
Ezaki 2006   59  0.6751  0.0061  0.0459  0.0458  0.0363  0.03
Falvay 1989   2  0.881  0.311  0.302  0.555  0.512  0.53
Fiorentino 1962   18  0.8250  0.0024  0.0821  0.3813  0.4017  0.39
Fliere 1977   30  0.8045  0.0038  0.0736  0.0752  0.0548  0.06
Fou 1978   34  0.7835  0.0030  0.0930  0.2027  0.1626  0.18
Francois 1956   57  0.6831  0.0045  0.0458  0.0432  0.1147  0.07
Goldenweiser 1946   62  0.5766  0.0060  0.0545  0.0547  0.0653  0.05
Gornostaeva 1994   39  0.7543  0.0047  0.0547  0.0545  0.0460  0.04
Groot 1988   11  0.849  0.0123  0.0824  0.3736  0.0828  0.17
Hatto 1993   5  0.8637  0.0010  0.0917  0.4212  0.4312  0.42
Hatto 1997   10  0.8557  0.0012  0.1514  0.4212  0.3915  0.40
Horszowski 1983   60  0.6636  0.0051  0.0451  0.0452  0.0557  0.04
Indjic 2001   7  0.8562  0.0011  0.1613  0.4310  0.4410  0.43
Katin 1996   4  0.8630  0.0016  0.1019  0.4117  0.3619  0.38
Kiepura 1999   52  0.7133  0.0037  0.0735  0.0718  0.3429  0.15
Korecka 1992   20  0.8234  0.0021  0.0823  0.3819  0.3521  0.36
Kushner 1990   48  0.7313  0.0132  0.0632  0.1229  0.1433  0.13
Lilamand 2001   63  0.3960  0.0063  0.0364  0.0357  0.0364  0.03
Luisada 1990   16  0.8326  0.0019  0.1210  0.4623  0.2324  0.33
Luisada 2008   12  0.8411  0.0118  0.1612  0.4423  0.2425  0.32
Lushtak 2004   36  0.7716  0.0148  0.0738  0.0740  0.0551  0.06
Malcuzynski 1951   61  0.5927  0.0058  0.0457  0.0443  0.0562  0.04
Malcuzynski 1961   19  0.828  0.016  0.145  0.5217  0.3016  0.39
Magaloff 1977   37  0.777  0.0150  0.0734  0.0726  0.1637  0.11
Magin 1975   28  0.8040  0.0036  0.0737  0.0742  0.0649  0.06
Meguri 1997   51  0.7222  0.0056  0.0549  0.0537  0.0750  0.06
Milkina 1970   35  0.7763  0.0035  0.0641  0.0633  0.0844  0.07
Mohovich 1999   27  0.8120  0.0127  0.1122  0.3816  0.4514  0.41
Nezu 2005   15  0.835  0.0213  0.1018  0.4110  0.4411  0.42
Ohlsson 1999   9  0.8512  0.0117  0.1411  0.4522  0.3020  0.37
Olejniczak 1990   38  0.7752  0.0049  0.0544  0.0546  0.0556  0.05
Osinska 1989   24  0.8161  0.0028  0.1526  0.3642  0.0532  0.13
Perlemuter 1992   54  0.7015  0.0139  0.0456  0.0428  0.1243  0.07
Poblocka 1999   3  0.8821  0.003  0.257  0.498  0.446  0.46
Rangell 2001   58  0.6764  0.0062  0.0454  0.0441  0.0461  0.04
Richter 1960   23  0.813  0.119  0.1020  0.419  0.459  0.43
Richter 1961   21  0.8217  0.0115  0.1016  0.4210  0.497  0.45
Rosen 1989   50  0.7259  0.0033  0.0639  0.0628  0.1341  0.09
Rubinstein 1939   17  0.8214  0.017  0.113  0.5410  0.454  0.49
Rubinstein 1952   32  0.792  0.244  0.246  0.5113  0.3018  0.39
Rubinstein 1966   8  0.8529  0.008  0.154  0.5213  0.3313  0.41
Rudanovskaya 2007   42  0.7558  0.0052  0.0362  0.0322  0.2840  0.09
Shebanova 2002   31  0.806  0.0234  0.1133  0.1125  0.1830  0.14
Smith 1975   40  0.7518  0.0140  0.0550  0.0530  0.1539  0.09
Sztompka 1959   41  0.7544  0.0054  0.0548  0.0534  0.0945  0.07
Tanyel 1992   56  0.6853  0.0059  0.0460  0.0448  0.0558  0.04
Tsujii 2005   29  0.8042  0.0029  0.0829  0.2533  0.0635  0.12
Uninsky 1959   6  0.8610  0.015  0.168  0.4910  0.485  0.48
Vardi 1988   26  0.8141  0.0020  0.0915  0.427  0.478  0.44
Wasowski 1980   33  0.7825  0.0031  0.0731  0.1334  0.0738  0.10
Zimerman 1975   13  0.8448  0.0022  0.0927  0.3512  0.3722  0.36
Random 1   66  -0.0547  0.0065  0.0265  0.0249  0.0465  0.03
Random 2   65  -0.0155  0.0066  0.0166  0.0162  0.0266  0.01
Random 3   64  0.1749  0.0064  0.0461  0.0447  0.0459  0.04

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).