Hatto 1997

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   62  0.3215  0.009  0.148  0.545  0.628  0.58
Ax 1995   57  0.446  0.0044  0.0546  0.0527  0.2838  0.12
Bacha 1998   50  0.5124  0.0028  0.0930  0.159  0.5228  0.28
Barbosa 1983   56  0.4517  0.0011  0.1513  0.477  0.6110  0.54
BenOr 1989   13  0.6150  0.0020  0.0917  0.4322  0.4118  0.42
Biret 1990   42  0.548  0.0051  0.0637  0.0642  0.0649  0.06
Brailowsky 1960   61  0.3737  0.0060  0.0552  0.0541  0.0745  0.06
Chiu 1999   29  0.573  0.0026  0.0926  0.2520  0.3626  0.30
Clidat 1994   51  0.5138  0.0033  0.0542  0.0519  0.3732  0.14
Cohen 1997   63  0.267  0.0063  0.0364  0.0348  0.0464  0.03
Cortot 1951   14  0.6110  0.0038  0.0545  0.0536  0.0656  0.05
Csalog 1996   3  0.7020  0.003  0.323  0.719  0.536  0.61
Czerny 1989   27  0.5821  0.0015  0.1014  0.4716  0.4715  0.47
Ezaki 2006   33  0.5657  0.0025  0.0923  0.2822  0.3525  0.31
Falvay 1989   4  0.7011  0.006  0.194  0.6813  0.4212  0.53
Fiorentino 1962   36  0.5531  0.0043  0.0636  0.0646  0.0648  0.06
Fliere 1977   8  0.6614  0.004  0.176  0.665  0.664  0.66
Fou 1978   11  0.6251  0.0010  0.1210  0.5311  0.5013  0.51
Francois 1956   53  0.4619  0.0061  0.0361  0.0355  0.0465  0.03
Goldenweiser 1946   15  0.6123  0.0022  0.0921  0.3712  0.4519  0.41
Gornostaeva 1994   55  0.4532  0.0047  0.0456  0.0420  0.4335  0.13
Groot 1988   31  0.5758  0.0027  0.1027  0.2435  0.0833  0.14
Hatto 1993   2  0.942  0.072  0.952  0.992  0.992  0.99
Hatto 1997   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Horszowski 1983   26  0.5928  0.008  0.1212  0.507  0.629  0.56
Indjic 2001   1  0.961  0.921  0.901  0.992  0.991  0.99
Katin 1996   22  0.5959  0.0036  0.0638  0.0640  0.0746  0.06
Kiepura 1999   59  0.4316  0.0055  0.0455  0.0448  0.0650  0.05
Korecka 1992   10  0.6226  0.0037  0.0547  0.058  0.6630  0.18
Kushner 1990   58  0.4360  0.0058  0.0550  0.0554  0.0458  0.04
Lilamand 2001   19  0.605  0.0014  0.1015  0.4612  0.6311  0.54
Luisada 1990   9  0.6639  0.005  0.195  0.675  0.673  0.67
Luisada 2008   37  0.5530  0.0024  0.0924  0.2813  0.4122  0.34
Lushtak 2004   17  0.619  0.0021  0.1219  0.4024  0.2823  0.33
Malcuzynski 1951   38  0.5452  0.0031  0.0531  0.1010  0.5229  0.23
Malcuzynski 1961   20  0.604  0.0016  0.1116  0.4317  0.4617  0.44
Magaloff 1977   43  0.5422  0.0049  0.0459  0.0454  0.0459  0.04
Magin 1975   35  0.5561  0.0035  0.0541  0.0542  0.0651  0.05
Meguri 1997   23  0.5953  0.0045  0.0458  0.0428  0.2840  0.11
Milkina 1970   45  0.5362  0.0056  0.0553  0.0556  0.0457  0.04
Mohovich 1999   40  0.5435  0.0053  0.0733  0.0762  0.0354  0.05
Nezu 2005   6  0.6733  0.0017  0.0925  0.2719  0.3724  0.32
Ohlsson 1999   47  0.5254  0.0048  0.0457  0.0436  0.0752  0.05
Olejniczak 1990   24  0.5940  0.0041  0.0543  0.0517  0.3139  0.12
Osinska 1989   12  0.6263  0.0046  0.0635  0.0646  0.0644  0.06
Perlemuter 1992   60  0.4255  0.0062  0.0362  0.0353  0.0362  0.03
Poblocka 1999   5  0.6913  0.007  0.227  0.613  0.675  0.64
Rangell 2001   46  0.5244  0.0050  0.0548  0.0545  0.0655  0.05
Richter 1960   25  0.5941  0.0034  0.0640  0.0631  0.2141  0.11
Richter 1961   44  0.5342  0.0042  0.0551  0.0527  0.2836  0.12
Rosen 1989   48  0.5234  0.0057  0.0360  0.0347  0.0661  0.04
Rubinstein 1939   16  0.6129  0.0012  0.159  0.535  0.637  0.58
Rubinstein 1952   34  0.5645  0.0032  0.0532  0.0922  0.2731  0.16
Rubinstein 1966   39  0.5446  0.0039  0.0554  0.0547  0.0553  0.05
Rudanovskaya 2007   21  0.6064  0.0059  0.0544  0.0559  0.0360  0.04
Shebanova 2002   41  0.5443  0.0030  0.0828  0.1740  0.0642  0.10
Smith 1975   32  0.5665  0.0040  0.0549  0.0522  0.3234  0.13
Sztompka 1959   52  0.4818  0.0054  0.0639  0.0651  0.0647  0.06
Tanyel 1992   54  0.4625  0.0052  0.0634  0.0622  0.2537  0.12
Tsujii 2005   7  0.6727  0.0013  0.1011  0.5122  0.2721  0.37
Uninsky 1959   18  0.6047  0.0023  0.1022  0.3413  0.4420  0.39
Vardi 1988   28  0.5812  0.0019  0.1118  0.4211  0.5714  0.49
Wasowski 1980   49  0.5256  0.0029  0.0629  0.1715  0.5127  0.29
Zimerman 1975   30  0.5736  0.0018  0.0920  0.3711  0.5716  0.46
Random 1   65  0.0548  0.0064  0.0363  0.0311  0.2943  0.09
Random 2   64  0.0666  0.0065  0.0265  0.0237  0.0663  0.03
Random 3   66  -0.0549  0.0066  0.0166  0.0163  0.0266  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).