Perlemuter 1992

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   24  0.7957  0.0026  0.0527  0.1351  0.0435  0.07
Ax 1995   59  0.6627  0.0159  0.0362  0.0363  0.0364  0.03
Bacha 1998   55  0.7024  0.0130  0.0428  0.1256  0.0433  0.07
Barbosa 1983   53  0.7145  0.0015  0.097  0.2827  0.187  0.22
BenOr 1989   21  0.8055  0.0023  0.0724  0.1556  0.0432  0.08
Biret 1990   26  0.777  0.0331  0.0526  0.1331  0.0921  0.11
Brailowsky 1960   48  0.7328  0.0032  0.0531  0.0934  0.0729  0.08
Chiu 1999   54  0.7034  0.0054  0.0444  0.0454  0.0444  0.04
Clidat 1994   52  0.7222  0.0134  0.0446  0.0442  0.0640  0.05
Cohen 1997   63  0.5663  0.0063  0.0361  0.0357  0.0463  0.03
Cortot 1951   39  0.7526  0.0140  0.0633  0.0625  0.1725  0.10
Csalog 1996   16  0.8129  0.0020  0.0711  0.2535  0.0812  0.14
Czerny 1989   57  0.6965  0.0057  0.0539  0.0555  0.0446  0.04
Ezaki 2006   45  0.7450  0.0052  0.0457  0.0457  0.0358  0.03
Falvay 1989   38  0.7551  0.0053  0.0455  0.0463  0.0361  0.03
Fiorentino 1962   6  0.838  0.0319  0.0723  0.1556  0.0527  0.09
Fliere 1977   1  0.872  0.112  0.172  0.5517  0.361  0.44
Fou 1978   58  0.6840  0.0047  0.0453  0.0441  0.0638  0.05
Francois 1956   29  0.7743  0.0037  0.0449  0.0415  0.3123  0.11
Goldenweiser 1946   44  0.7452  0.009  0.0915  0.2425  0.169  0.20
Gornostaeva 1994   30  0.7758  0.0043  0.0442  0.0463  0.0365  0.03
Groot 1988   9  0.8211  0.0221  0.088  0.2743  0.0713  0.14
Hatto 1993   36  0.7633  0.0046  0.0359  0.0350  0.0557  0.04
Hatto 1997   49  0.7366  0.0029  0.0532  0.0951  0.0534  0.07
Horszowski 1983   56  0.7044  0.0025  0.0430  0.0936  0.0728  0.08
Indjic 2001   42  0.7562  0.0048  0.0535  0.0553  0.0542  0.05
Katin 1996   12  0.8148  0.0035  0.0450  0.0450  0.0548  0.04
Kiepura 1999   60  0.6523  0.0160  0.0452  0.0458  0.0359  0.03
Korecka 1992   46  0.7439  0.0051  0.0443  0.0450  0.0545  0.04
Kushner 1990   34  0.7660  0.0024  0.0525  0.1344  0.0530  0.08
Lilamand 2001   35  0.7612  0.0213  0.0620  0.2214  0.433  0.31
Luisada 1990   25  0.7864  0.0028  0.0729  0.1264  0.0337  0.06
Luisada 2008   32  0.7741  0.0033  0.0538  0.0539  0.0539  0.05
Lushtak 2004   13  0.8125  0.0136  0.0454  0.0451  0.0451  0.04
Malcuzynski 1951   37  0.7536  0.006  0.1122  0.2018  0.228  0.21
Malcuzynski 1961   40  0.756  0.0510  0.0612  0.2544  0.0616  0.12
Magaloff 1977   19  0.8035  0.0022  0.0718  0.2337  0.0715  0.13
Magin 1975   20  0.8049  0.0011  0.0513  0.2534  0.0714  0.13
Meguri 1997   50  0.7310  0.0250  0.0536  0.0557  0.0449  0.04
Milkina 1970   22  0.7954  0.0038  0.0445  0.0446  0.0547  0.04
Mohovich 1999   31  0.7753  0.0056  0.0448  0.0442  0.0555  0.04
Nezu 2005   41  0.759  0.0244  0.0537  0.0554  0.0453  0.04
Ohlsson 1999   4  0.835  0.055  0.161  0.5629  0.164  0.30
Olejniczak 1990   10  0.8213  0.0216  0.0717  0.2345  0.0522  0.11
Osinska 1989   3  0.8442  0.0018  0.0921  0.2035  0.0524  0.10
Perlemuter 1992   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Poblocka 1999   27  0.7759  0.0042  0.0451  0.0464  0.0360  0.03
Rangell 2001   28  0.7718  0.0141  0.0541  0.0530  0.1136  0.07
Richter 1960   47  0.7438  0.0045  0.0458  0.0450  0.0450  0.04
Richter 1961   62  0.5920  0.0162  0.0363  0.0344  0.0543  0.04
Rosen 1989   18  0.8046  0.0012  0.0619  0.2234  0.0718  0.12
Rubinstein 1939   15  0.8114  0.027  0.126  0.3129  0.166  0.22
Rubinstein 1952   5  0.831  0.251  0.243  0.4820  0.242  0.34
Rubinstein 1966   17  0.8119  0.0127  0.0616  0.2350  0.0520  0.11
Rudanovskaya 2007   43  0.7521  0.0158  0.0456  0.0441  0.0641  0.05
Shebanova 2002   8  0.823  0.093  0.114  0.3949  0.0610  0.15
Smith 1975   14  0.8116  0.0214  0.0810  0.2642  0.0519  0.11
Sztompka 1959   11  0.824  0.054  0.125  0.3622  0.235  0.29
Tanyel 1992   23  0.7932  0.0039  0.0540  0.0555  0.0452  0.04
Tsujii 2005   2  0.8415  0.0217  0.0814  0.2535  0.0617  0.12
Uninsky 1959   33  0.7637  0.0049  0.0447  0.0462  0.0362  0.03
Vardi 1988   61  0.6447  0.0061  0.0264  0.0261  0.0366  0.02
Wasowski 1980   7  0.8330  0.008  0.119  0.2735  0.0711  0.14
Zimerman 1975   51  0.7217  0.0255  0.0534  0.0551  0.0456  0.04
Random 1   66  -0.0861  0.0066  0.0166  0.0122  0.1654  0.04
Random 2   65  0.0631  0.0065  0.0265  0.027  0.4126  0.09
Random 3   64  0.1556  0.0064  0.0360  0.0321  0.2031  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).