Ashkenazy 1981

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Ax 1995   1  0.492  0.282  0.411  0.781  0.761  0.77
Bacha 1998   50  0.1458  0.0049  0.0650  0.0628  0.1638  0.10
Barbosa 1983   4  0.3710  0.015  0.1120  0.4526  0.2823  0.35
BenOr 1989   55  0.0854  0.0056  0.0555  0.0552  0.0461  0.04
Biret 1990   37  0.2144  0.0044  0.0738  0.0743  0.0650  0.06
Brailowsky 1960   48  0.1631  0.0047  0.0836  0.0828  0.2633  0.14
Chiu 1999   30  0.2449  0.0045  0.0837  0.0837  0.0742  0.07
Clidat 1994   14  0.3019  0.0115  0.0930  0.2739  0.0734  0.14
Cohen 1997   60  0.0440  0.0061  0.0558  0.0547  0.0460  0.04
Cortot 1951   56  0.0836  0.0059  0.0461  0.0457  0.0462  0.04
Csalog 1996   25  0.266  0.0222  0.0925  0.3636  0.0831  0.17
Czerny 1989   18  0.2824  0.0032  0.1031  0.1931  0.1829  0.18
Ezaki 2006   5  0.363  0.144  0.294  0.6513  0.544  0.59
Falvay 1989   15  0.3011  0.0114  0.197  0.6017  0.3618  0.46
Fiorentino 1962   20  0.285  0.0211  0.1113  0.5320  0.4117  0.47
Fliere 1977   46  0.1742  0.0046  0.0934  0.0936  0.0841  0.08
Fou 1978   41  0.207  0.0220  0.1229  0.3029  0.1927  0.24
Francois 1956   63  0.0260  0.0064  0.0363  0.0357  0.0363  0.03
Goldenweiser 1946   34  0.2223  0.0029  0.1228  0.3015  0.3724  0.33
Gornostaeva 1994   51  0.1262  0.0058  0.0551  0.0544  0.0656  0.05
Groot 1988   40  0.2055  0.0035  0.0642  0.0650  0.0557  0.05
Hatto 1993   8  0.3245  0.0010  0.166  0.6111  0.518  0.56
Hatto 1997   7  0.328  0.029  0.125  0.628  0.545  0.58
Horszowski 1983   49  0.1552  0.0034  0.0640  0.0645  0.0553  0.05
Indjic 2001   19  0.289  0.018  0.098  0.6010  0.519  0.55
Katin 1996   58  0.0747  0.0053  0.0459  0.0455  0.0458  0.04
Kiepura 1999   38  0.2133  0.0048  0.0835  0.0854  0.0544  0.06
Korecka 1992   45  0.1861  0.0050  0.0739  0.0723  0.4230  0.17
Kushner 1990   54  0.0864  0.0055  0.0554  0.0538  0.0747  0.06
Lilamand 2001   16  0.2950  0.0017  0.0915  0.4820  0.5014  0.49
Luisada 1990   2  0.391  0.291  0.292  0.736  0.642  0.68
Luisada 2008   29  0.2517  0.0139  0.0646  0.0633  0.0843  0.07
Lushtak 2004   23  0.2729  0.0036  0.0641  0.0644  0.0648  0.06
Malcuzynski 1951   43  0.1937  0.0037  0.0643  0.0623  0.3535  0.14
Malcuzynski 1961   21  0.2835  0.0028  0.0924  0.3731  0.1428  0.23
Magaloff 1977   32  0.2351  0.0033  0.0933  0.0919  0.2932  0.16
Magin 1975   9  0.3238  0.0025  0.1221  0.4527  0.2922  0.36
Meguri 1997   52  0.1265  0.0051  0.0557  0.0530  0.2039  0.10
Milkina 1970   47  0.1746  0.0041  0.0644  0.0640  0.0746  0.06
Mohovich 1999   57  0.0857  0.0057  0.0649  0.0651  0.0455  0.05
Nezu 2005   28  0.2525  0.0023  0.0919  0.4611  0.5016  0.48
Ohlsson 1999   12  0.3116  0.0121  0.1014  0.5214  0.4913  0.50
Olejniczak 1990   59  0.0666  0.0052  0.0553  0.0533  0.0851  0.06
Osinska 1989   42  0.1928  0.0024  0.1022  0.3919  0.4219  0.40
Perlemuter 1992   66  -0.0563  0.0065  0.0265  0.0266  0.0165  0.01
Poblocka 1999   22  0.2734  0.0030  0.1327  0.3123  0.3125  0.31
Rangell 2001   26  0.2614  0.017  0.1112  0.5515  0.5611  0.55
Richter 1960   27  0.2622  0.0027  0.1226  0.3623  0.3921  0.37
Richter 1961   31  0.2426  0.0043  0.0648  0.0639  0.0745  0.06
Rosen 1989   35  0.2212  0.0118  0.0918  0.4621  0.5215  0.49
Rubinstein 1939   11  0.3132  0.0013  0.169  0.5910  0.557  0.57
Rubinstein 1952   39  0.2041  0.0038  0.0647  0.0638  0.0752  0.06
Rubinstein 1966   10  0.3120  0.0016  0.1017  0.4630  0.1626  0.27
Rudanovskaya 2007   61  0.0348  0.0060  0.0460  0.0457  0.0459  0.04
Shebanova 2002   33  0.2359  0.0040  0.0552  0.0550  0.0554  0.05
Smith 1975   44  0.1953  0.0042  0.0645  0.0626  0.2237  0.11
Sztompka 1959   53  0.0913  0.0154  0.0556  0.0531  0.1540  0.09
Tanyel 1992   6  0.3343  0.0012  0.1511  0.5613  0.606  0.58
Tsujii 2005   13  0.314  0.053  0.243  0.705  0.563  0.63
Uninsky 1959   36  0.2118  0.0126  0.1123  0.3917  0.4020  0.39
Vardi 1988   17  0.2956  0.0031  0.0932  0.1942  0.0736  0.12
Wasowski 1980   24  0.2730  0.0019  0.0916  0.476  0.6112  0.54
Zimerman 1975   3  0.3827  0.006  0.1010  0.5812  0.5310  0.55
Random 1   62  0.0321  0.0062  0.0362  0.0322  0.1349  0.06
Random 2   64  0.0039  0.0063  0.0264  0.0260  0.0364  0.02
Random 3   65  -0.0415  0.0166  0.0166  0.0166  0.0166  0.01

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).