Lilamand 2001

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   21  0.6841  0.0026  0.1021  0.3440  0.0519  0.13
Ax 1995   40  0.5943  0.0040  0.0642  0.0660  0.0356  0.04
Bacha 1998   61  0.3954  0.0056  0.0357  0.0364  0.0361  0.03
Barbosa 1983   36  0.6244  0.0028  0.0829  0.2444  0.0622  0.12
BenOr 1989   7  0.748  0.039  0.152  0.6329  0.148  0.30
Biret 1990   41  0.5963  0.0047  0.0454  0.0462  0.0457  0.04
Brailowsky 1960   58  0.4761  0.0059  0.0263  0.0263  0.0365  0.02
Chiu 1999   27  0.6616  0.0113  0.1122  0.3246  0.0517  0.13
Clidat 1994   57  0.4749  0.0057  0.0356  0.0354  0.0464  0.03
Cohen 1997   60  0.4557  0.0058  0.0358  0.0350  0.0555  0.04
Cortot 1951   52  0.5546  0.0046  0.0455  0.0443  0.0558  0.04
Csalog 1996   14  0.7318  0.0115  0.1412  0.4345  0.0612  0.16
Czerny 1989   35  0.6221  0.0134  0.1036  0.1061  0.0436  0.06
Ezaki 2006   10  0.7422  0.0014  0.1513  0.4320  0.265  0.33
Falvay 1989   49  0.565  0.0422  0.1032  0.1850  0.0432  0.08
Fiorentino 1962   37  0.6238  0.0044  0.0548  0.0549  0.0546  0.05
Fliere 1977   22  0.6750  0.0033  0.1134  0.1155  0.0434  0.07
Fou 1978   31  0.6460  0.0025  0.0926  0.2854  0.0521  0.12
Francois 1956   47  0.5855  0.0048  0.0552  0.0556  0.0459  0.04
Goldenweiser 1946   2  0.781  0.401  0.393  0.589  0.411  0.49
Gornostaeva 1994   20  0.6928  0.0029  0.1227  0.2758  0.0429  0.10
Groot 1988   26  0.6627  0.0035  0.1233  0.1262  0.0339  0.06
Hatto 1993   50  0.5626  0.0053  0.0644  0.0659  0.0448  0.05
Hatto 1997   54  0.5423  0.0054  0.0641  0.0662  0.0442  0.05
Horszowski 1983   11  0.732  0.123  0.191  0.6517  0.204  0.36
Indjic 2001   51  0.5534  0.0055  0.0838  0.0859  0.0437  0.06
Katin 1996   45  0.5835  0.0052  0.0549  0.0553  0.0452  0.04
Kiepura 1999   56  0.4753  0.0060  0.0360  0.0360  0.0360  0.03
Korecka 1992   48  0.5736  0.0039  0.0547  0.0563  0.0351  0.04
Kushner 1990   29  0.6517  0.0123  0.0923  0.3163  0.0328  0.10
Lilamand 2001   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Luisada 1990   25  0.6752  0.0030  0.0928  0.2643  0.0526  0.11
Luisada 2008   30  0.6465  0.0036  0.1035  0.1043  0.0535  0.07
Lushtak 2004   12  0.7330  0.0016  0.1317  0.4041  0.0516  0.14
Malcuzynski 1951   32  0.6325  0.008  0.1024  0.3135  0.0524  0.12
Malcuzynski 1961   38  0.6115  0.0124  0.1019  0.3758  0.0515  0.14
Magaloff 1977   4  0.7724  0.006  0.104  0.5436  0.0711  0.19
Magin 1975   28  0.6620  0.0131  0.0930  0.2164  0.0333  0.08
Meguri 1997   3  0.7712  0.014  0.117  0.4629  0.217  0.31
Milkina 1970   15  0.7132  0.0019  0.1116  0.4154  0.0418  0.13
Mohovich 1999   34  0.6239  0.0043  0.0837  0.0855  0.0438  0.06
Nezu 2005   44  0.5848  0.0041  0.0643  0.0640  0.0544  0.05
Ohlsson 1999   46  0.5819  0.0149  0.0646  0.0661  0.0441  0.05
Olejniczak 1990   8  0.7445  0.0010  0.128  0.4556  0.0420  0.13
Osinska 1989   24  0.6731  0.0032  0.1031  0.1837  0.0530  0.09
Perlemuter 1992   6  0.7633  0.007  0.1214  0.4320  0.226  0.31
Poblocka 1999   43  0.5966  0.0051  0.0550  0.0558  0.0449  0.04
Rangell 2001   5  0.777  0.035  0.115  0.515  0.472  0.49
Richter 1960   59  0.4540  0.0061  0.0359  0.0364  0.0363  0.03
Richter 1961   63  0.3051  0.0064  0.0264  0.0264  0.0366  0.02
Rosen 1989   9  0.7411  0.0111  0.1611  0.4545  0.0514  0.15
Rubinstein 1939   53  0.5556  0.0050  0.0551  0.0561  0.0450  0.04
Rubinstein 1952   23  0.6737  0.0027  0.1125  0.2946  0.0525  0.12
Rubinstein 1966   33  0.6247  0.0042  0.0645  0.0664  0.0353  0.04
Rudanovskaya 2007   42  0.5910  0.0245  0.0453  0.0439  0.0643  0.05
Shebanova 2002   18  0.7013  0.0121  0.1215  0.4145  0.0613  0.16
Smith 1975   13  0.739  0.0212  0.1310  0.4533  0.0810  0.19
Sztompka 1959   17  0.716  0.0417  0.189  0.4528  0.129  0.23
Tanyel 1992   1  0.803  0.092  0.266  0.4917  0.403  0.44
Tsujii 2005   16  0.714  0.0520  0.1218  0.3857  0.0423  0.12
Uninsky 1959   39  0.6029  0.0037  0.0740  0.0754  0.0440  0.05
Vardi 1988   62  0.3942  0.0062  0.0361  0.0363  0.0362  0.03
Wasowski 1980   19  0.6964  0.0018  0.1420  0.3662  0.0327  0.10
Zimerman 1975   55  0.5414  0.0138  0.0739  0.0753  0.0447  0.05
Random 1   66  -0.0458  0.0066  0.0166  0.0112  0.2745  0.05
Random 2   65  0.0759  0.0065  0.0265  0.025  0.4531  0.09
Random 3   64  0.1362  0.0063  0.0262  0.0230  0.0854  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).