Richter 1960

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   21  0.826  0.0225  0.0823  0.2849  0.0525  0.12
Ax 1995   54  0.7056  0.0036  0.0636  0.0640  0.0639  0.06
Bacha 1998   23  0.819  0.014  0.1110  0.4521  0.416  0.43
Barbosa 1983   59  0.6539  0.0053  0.0450  0.0458  0.0550  0.04
BenOr 1989   49  0.7159  0.0058  0.0364  0.0351  0.0555  0.04
Biret 1990   9  0.8553  0.0015  0.119  0.4542  0.0522  0.15
Brailowsky 1960   14  0.843  0.029  0.145  0.5212  0.413  0.46
Chiu 1999   56  0.6824  0.0157  0.0360  0.0356  0.0462  0.03
Clidat 1994   18  0.8355  0.0012  0.138  0.4617  0.434  0.44
Cohen 1997   57  0.6764  0.0052  0.0456  0.0431  0.1735  0.08
Cortot 1951   37  0.7654  0.0031  0.0631  0.1321  0.2119  0.17
Csalog 1996   50  0.7132  0.0049  0.0358  0.0354  0.0551  0.04
Czerny 1989   51  0.7151  0.0043  0.0735  0.0754  0.0441  0.05
Ezaki 2006   47  0.717  0.0259  0.0361  0.0363  0.0359  0.03
Falvay 1989   13  0.8427  0.005  0.1214  0.4435  0.0815  0.19
Fiorentino 1962   16  0.8452  0.0023  0.0722  0.2833  0.1018  0.17
Fliere 1977   11  0.8457  0.0020  0.0819  0.3240  0.0623  0.14
Fou 1978   61  0.6437  0.0056  0.0452  0.0464  0.0363  0.03
Francois 1956   24  0.8134  0.0021  0.0920  0.318  0.429  0.36
Goldenweiser 1946   63  0.5658  0.0062  0.0359  0.0361  0.0460  0.03
Gornostaeva 1994   30  0.7762  0.0038  0.0449  0.0454  0.0454  0.04
Groot 1988   8  0.8515  0.0114  0.0912  0.4538  0.0717  0.18
Hatto 1993   28  0.7728  0.0033  0.0732  0.1343  0.0631  0.09
Hatto 1997   34  0.7638  0.0034  0.0638  0.0650  0.0638  0.06
Horszowski 1983   62  0.6221  0.0146  0.0542  0.0559  0.0447  0.04
Indjic 2001   35  0.7636  0.0035  0.0934  0.0955  0.0537  0.07
Katin 1996   5  0.8631  0.0011  0.1411  0.4522  0.2711  0.35
Kiepura 1999   40  0.7440  0.0016  0.1018  0.364  0.515  0.43
Korecka 1992   29  0.7763  0.0032  0.0829  0.1644  0.0627  0.10
Kushner 1990   55  0.6816  0.0141  0.0541  0.0563  0.0349  0.04
Lilamand 2001   64  0.4544  0.0064  0.0365  0.0360  0.0365  0.03
Luisada 1990   17  0.8317  0.0117  0.1215  0.4039  0.0524  0.14
Luisada 2008   22  0.8247  0.0026  0.0824  0.2751  0.0428  0.10
Lushtak 2004   19  0.8314  0.0127  0.0821  0.3133  0.1116  0.18
Malcuzynski 1951   58  0.6626  0.0019  0.0833  0.1238  0.0536  0.08
Malcuzynski 1961   48  0.7150  0.0042  0.0637  0.0653  0.0543  0.05
Magaloff 1977   43  0.7342  0.0055  0.0545  0.0553  0.0545  0.05
Magin 1975   27  0.7935  0.0030  0.0728  0.1850  0.0529  0.09
Meguri 1997   60  0.6448  0.0063  0.0363  0.0364  0.0364  0.03
Milkina 1970   39  0.7461  0.0047  0.0540  0.0542  0.0542  0.05
Mohovich 1999   12  0.8418  0.0118  0.1816  0.4020  0.427  0.41
Nezu 2005   36  0.7619  0.0137  0.0639  0.0640  0.0546  0.05
Ohlsson 1999   6  0.852  0.0413  0.1117  0.3928  0.2012  0.28
Olejniczak 1990   31  0.7749  0.0039  0.0454  0.0458  0.0457  0.04
Osinska 1989   10  0.858  0.017  0.1213  0.4425  0.1713  0.27
Perlemuter 1992   42  0.7420  0.0144  0.0451  0.0459  0.0361  0.03
Poblocka 1999   4  0.8612  0.016  0.104  0.5333  0.1414  0.27
Rangell 2001   45  0.7225  0.0060  0.0455  0.0437  0.0556  0.04
Richter 1960   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Richter 1961   1  0.901  0.651  0.641  0.771  0.841  0.80
Rosen 1989   46  0.7245  0.0045  0.0544  0.0554  0.0453  0.04
Rubinstein 1939   7  0.8530  0.008  0.117  0.5025  0.2410  0.35
Rubinstein 1952   38  0.7641  0.0040  0.0543  0.0561  0.0458  0.04
Rubinstein 1966   2  0.8710  0.012  0.232  0.5420  0.248  0.36
Rudanovskaya 2007   32  0.7746  0.0048  0.0457  0.0428  0.1633  0.08
Shebanova 2002   44  0.7323  0.0154  0.0546  0.0551  0.0644  0.05
Smith 1975   41  0.7429  0.0051  0.0453  0.0442  0.0640  0.05
Sztompka 1959   52  0.7067  0.0061  0.0547  0.0560  0.0448  0.04
Tanyel 1992   53  0.704  0.0250  0.0448  0.0454  0.0452  0.04
Tsujii 2005   15  0.8413  0.0124  0.0725  0.2249  0.0430  0.09
Uninsky 1959   33  0.7633  0.0022  0.0730  0.1561  0.0432  0.08
Vardi 1988   20  0.8322  0.013  0.196  0.501  0.582  0.54
Wasowski 1980   26  0.7943  0.0029  0.0827  0.2152  0.0526  0.10
Zimerman 1975   25  0.8011  0.0128  0.0926  0.2234  0.1021  0.15
Average   3  0.875  0.0210  0.113  0.5353  0.0520  0.16
Random 1   67  -0.0566  0.0066  0.0266  0.028  0.3534  0.08
Random 2   66  0.0065  0.0067  0.0167  0.0144  0.0567  0.02
Random 3   65  0.1660  0.0065  0.0362  0.0345  0.0466  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).