Goldenweiser 1946

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   37  0.6810  0.0329  0.0624  0.1744  0.0534  0.09
Ax 1995   22  0.7421  0.0126  0.0720  0.2411  0.3912  0.31
Bacha 1998   55  0.5762  0.0041  0.0647  0.0645  0.0550  0.05
Barbosa 1983   26  0.7325  0.0138  0.0834  0.0829  0.1329  0.10
BenOr 1989   6  0.788  0.047  0.1310  0.4115  0.356  0.38
Biret 1990   43  0.6744  0.0047  0.0740  0.0760  0.0454  0.05
Brailowsky 1960   61  0.5334  0.0058  0.0458  0.0460  0.0456  0.04
Chiu 1999   54  0.5935  0.0027  0.0632  0.1053  0.0440  0.06
Clidat 1994   57  0.5650  0.0057  0.0459  0.0456  0.0460  0.04
Cohen 1997   62  0.4065  0.0062  0.0364  0.0355  0.0466  0.03
Cortot 1951   49  0.6440  0.0053  0.0646  0.0656  0.0455  0.05
Csalog 1996   32  0.7013  0.0234  0.0553  0.0528  0.1532  0.09
Czerny 1989   2  0.796  0.075  0.104  0.462  0.561  0.51
Ezaki 2006   45  0.6517  0.0145  0.0649  0.0614  0.3024  0.13
Falvay 1989   51  0.6324  0.0151  0.0738  0.0752  0.0448  0.05
Fiorentino 1962   50  0.6436  0.0054  0.0645  0.0658  0.0453  0.05
Fliere 1977   42  0.6755  0.0044  0.0650  0.0641  0.0639  0.06
Fou 1978   21  0.742  0.114  0.152  0.478  0.404  0.43
Francois 1956   44  0.6639  0.0048  0.0737  0.0718  0.2527  0.13
Goldenweiser 1946   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Gornostaeva 1994   12  0.7549  0.0030  0.0527  0.1433  0.0731  0.10
Groot 1988   36  0.6942  0.0040  0.0736  0.0750  0.0545  0.06
Hatto 1993   39  0.6846  0.0021  0.0731  0.1149  0.0538  0.07
Hatto 1997   40  0.683  0.0912  0.0926  0.1647  0.0630  0.10
Horszowski 1983   29  0.7130  0.0025  0.0622  0.2018  0.1716  0.18
Indjic 2001   41  0.6819  0.0113  0.0828  0.1445  0.0633  0.09
Katin 1996   53  0.6063  0.0056  0.0741  0.0752  0.0542  0.06
Kiepura 1999   52  0.6245  0.0052  0.0457  0.0438  0.0646  0.05
Korecka 1992   24  0.7331  0.0036  0.0742  0.0742  0.0641  0.06
Kushner 1990   17  0.7464  0.0019  0.0818  0.2914  0.379  0.33
Lilamand 2001   5  0.785  0.083  0.129  0.413  0.582  0.49
Luisada 1990   15  0.759  0.049  0.1311  0.3629  0.1514  0.23
Luisada 2008   34  0.7059  0.0037  0.0739  0.0752  0.0451  0.05
Lushtak 2004   30  0.7153  0.0032  0.0630  0.1156  0.0437  0.07
Malcuzynski 1951   3  0.791  0.161  0.163  0.464  0.433  0.44
Malcuzynski 1961   10  0.7616  0.0114  0.086  0.4448  0.0519  0.15
Magaloff 1977   19  0.7423  0.0111  0.107  0.4314  0.308  0.36
Magin 1975   25  0.7352  0.0024  0.0721  0.2448  0.0528  0.11
Meguri 1997   23  0.737  0.046  0.1019  0.2810  0.4010  0.33
Milkina 1970   8  0.7718  0.0118  0.0812  0.3523  0.2013  0.26
Mohovich 1999   47  0.6522  0.0149  0.0833  0.0852  0.0444  0.06
Nezu 2005   38  0.6828  0.0039  0.0651  0.0647  0.0552  0.05
Ohlsson 1999   46  0.6547  0.0050  0.0835  0.0853  0.0543  0.06
Olejniczak 1990   11  0.7632  0.0016  0.095  0.4426  0.2411  0.32
Osinska 1989   4  0.7829  0.0010  0.118  0.4333  0.0717  0.17
Perlemuter 1992   18  0.7461  0.0031  0.0725  0.1615  0.2415  0.20
Poblocka 1999   20  0.7420  0.0135  0.0652  0.0652  0.0447  0.05
Rangell 2001   31  0.7048  0.0043  0.0643  0.0616  0.2926  0.13
Richter 1960   58  0.5654  0.0060  0.0460  0.0458  0.0363  0.03
Richter 1961   63  0.3951  0.0063  0.0363  0.0350  0.0462  0.03
Rosen 1989   28  0.7238  0.0020  0.0923  0.1826  0.1418  0.16
Rubinstein 1939   35  0.6960  0.0042  0.0556  0.0562  0.0357  0.04
Rubinstein 1952   1  0.824  0.092  0.141  0.5415  0.295  0.40
Rubinstein 1966   13  0.7526  0.0123  0.0817  0.3039  0.0722  0.14
Rudanovskaya 2007   60  0.5433  0.0061  0.0362  0.0362  0.0364  0.03
Shebanova 2002   9  0.7727  0.0022  0.0716  0.3152  0.0623  0.14
Smith 1975   48  0.6437  0.0046  0.0648  0.0647  0.0549  0.05
Sztompka 1959   27  0.7214  0.0133  0.0644  0.0616  0.3121  0.14
Tanyel 1992   16  0.7515  0.018  0.1015  0.3314  0.417  0.37
Tsujii 2005   14  0.7512  0.0217  0.1013  0.3539  0.0525  0.13
Uninsky 1959   33  0.7011  0.0228  0.0529  0.1238  0.0635  0.08
Vardi 1988   59  0.5443  0.0059  0.0555  0.0555  0.0458  0.04
Wasowski 1980   7  0.7766  0.0015  0.0814  0.3446  0.0620  0.14
Zimerman 1975   56  0.5641  0.0055  0.0554  0.0556  0.0461  0.04
Random 1   66  -0.1058  0.0065  0.0265  0.0244  0.0465  0.03
Random 2   65  -0.0257  0.0066  0.0166  0.0130  0.1659  0.04
Random 3   64  0.1756  0.0064  0.0361  0.0318  0.2436  0.08

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).