Tanyel 1992

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   9  0.8424  0.0012  0.1310  0.4638  0.0616  0.17
Ax 1995   45  0.7341  0.0043  0.0544  0.0541  0.0644  0.05
Bacha 1998   60  0.6863  0.0048  0.0548  0.0560  0.0450  0.04
Barbosa 1983   63  0.6051  0.0058  0.0364  0.0361  0.0462  0.03
BenOr 1989   17  0.8215  0.0119  0.1120  0.3530  0.1313  0.21
Biret 1990   8  0.8426  0.0013  0.118  0.4844  0.0521  0.15
Brailowsky 1960   59  0.6946  0.0063  0.0545  0.0559  0.0448  0.04
Chiu 1999   42  0.7460  0.0035  0.0547  0.0559  0.0449  0.04
Clidat 1994   49  0.7120  0.0041  0.0543  0.0541  0.0643  0.05
Cohen 1997   52  0.7028  0.0022  0.1028  0.207  0.5310  0.33
Cortot 1951   54  0.7052  0.0045  0.0833  0.0847  0.0435  0.06
Csalog 1996   7  0.8423  0.0010  0.1113  0.4216  0.378  0.39
Czerny 1989   56  0.6935  0.0044  0.0638  0.0657  0.0441  0.05
Ezaki 2006   28  0.7817  0.0134  0.0542  0.0541  0.0636  0.05
Falvay 1989   29  0.779  0.0146  0.0834  0.0857  0.0338  0.05
Fiorentino 1962   13  0.8331  0.0015  0.1011  0.4530  0.1212  0.23
Fliere 1977   18  0.8159  0.0040  0.0735  0.0745  0.0534  0.06
Fou 1978   30  0.7722  0.0018  0.0819  0.3533  0.0814  0.17
Francois 1956   47  0.7250  0.0051  0.0456  0.0442  0.0645  0.05
Goldenweiser 1946   40  0.7543  0.007  0.1214  0.4115  0.339  0.37
Gornostaeva 1994   25  0.7925  0.0030  0.0829  0.1952  0.0432  0.09
Groot 1988   12  0.8327  0.0023  0.0721  0.2953  0.0427  0.11
Hatto 1993   50  0.7047  0.0060  0.0362  0.0363  0.0365  0.03
Hatto 1997   57  0.698  0.0262  0.0549  0.0563  0.0356  0.04
Horszowski 1983   36  0.7630  0.0024  0.0725  0.2638  0.0722  0.13
Indjic 2001   53  0.7032  0.0061  0.0359  0.0360  0.0463  0.03
Katin 1996   39  0.7519  0.0154  0.0546  0.0554  0.0453  0.04
Kiepura 1999   61  0.6557  0.0050  0.0452  0.0456  0.0446  0.04
Korecka 1992   58  0.6936  0.0052  0.0454  0.0460  0.0360  0.03
Kushner 1990   34  0.7661  0.0029  0.0727  0.2055  0.0431  0.09
Lilamand 2001   22  0.8012  0.0117  0.0917  0.406  0.496  0.44
Luisada 1990   4  0.875  0.035  0.166  0.5125  0.2011  0.32
Luisada 2008   23  0.7966  0.0031  0.0830  0.1962  0.0333  0.08
Lushtak 2004   1  0.893  0.083  0.262  0.651  0.631  0.64
Malcuzynski 1951   55  0.6942  0.0028  0.0731  0.1532  0.0828  0.11
Malcuzynski 1961   41  0.7453  0.0020  0.0723  0.2754  0.0523  0.12
Magaloff 1977   11  0.8348  0.0014  0.0818  0.3640  0.0619  0.15
Magin 1975   35  0.7611  0.0147  0.0736  0.0759  0.0440  0.05
Meguri 1997   5  0.871  0.331  0.324  0.611  0.652  0.63
Milkina 1970   38  0.7544  0.0037  0.0457  0.0455  0.0451  0.04
Mohovich 1999   21  0.8062  0.0021  0.0816  0.4035  0.0620  0.15
Nezu 2005   19  0.8116  0.0116  0.099  0.4734  0.0615  0.17
Ohlsson 1999   43  0.7440  0.0053  0.0451  0.0457  0.0454  0.04
Olejniczak 1990   3  0.874  0.084  0.313  0.627  0.483  0.55
Osinska 1989   10  0.8437  0.008  0.217  0.5038  0.0518  0.16
Perlemuter 1992   24  0.7949  0.0038  0.0455  0.0440  0.0547  0.04
Poblocka 1999   26  0.7964  0.0033  0.0637  0.0645  0.0537  0.05
Rangell 2001   15  0.826  0.029  0.1315  0.412  0.605  0.50
Richter 1960   51  0.707  0.0255  0.0453  0.0447  0.0555  0.04
Richter 1961   62  0.6118  0.0157  0.0361  0.0358  0.0359  0.03
Rosen 1989   6  0.8613  0.016  0.165  0.5413  0.337  0.42
Rubinstein 1939   33  0.7633  0.0039  0.0540  0.0543  0.0639  0.05
Rubinstein 1952   31  0.7645  0.0027  0.0626  0.2142  0.0629  0.11
Rubinstein 1966   20  0.8056  0.0026  0.0722  0.2762  0.0430  0.10
Rudanovskaya 2007   37  0.7510  0.0142  0.0541  0.0523  0.2326  0.11
Shebanova 2002   27  0.7834  0.0032  0.0732  0.1333  0.0925  0.11
Smith 1975   14  0.8321  0.0025  0.0724  0.2649  0.0524  0.11
Sztompka 1959   46  0.7258  0.0059  0.0363  0.0356  0.0461  0.03
Tanyel 1992   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Tsujii 2005   2  0.892  0.242  0.271  0.666  0.424  0.53
Uninsky 1959   32  0.7638  0.0036  0.0458  0.0444  0.0552  0.04
Vardi 1988   48  0.7139  0.0049  0.0639  0.0650  0.0542  0.05
Wasowski 1980   16  0.8229  0.0011  0.1112  0.4242  0.0617  0.16
Zimerman 1975   44  0.7314  0.0156  0.0450  0.0454  0.0458  0.04
Random 1   66  -0.1054  0.0065  0.0265  0.0230  0.0857  0.04
Random 2   65  -0.0555  0.0066  0.0166  0.0161  0.0266  0.01
Random 3   64  0.1265  0.0064  0.0360  0.0362  0.0364  0.03

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).