Horszowski 1983

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   63  0.1560  0.0038  0.0545  0.0540  0.0658  0.05
Ax 1995   62  0.2661  0.0061  0.0360  0.0361  0.0364  0.03
Bacha 1998   55  0.3953  0.0047  0.0544  0.0524  0.2535  0.11
Barbosa 1983   40  0.456  0.064  0.1810  0.603  0.633  0.61
BenOr 1989   9  0.5915  0.018  0.119  0.6117  0.499  0.55
Biret 1990   12  0.5613  0.0123  0.1318  0.5220  0.3817  0.44
Brailowsky 1960   60  0.3163  0.0059  0.0458  0.0457  0.0460  0.04
Chiu 1999   51  0.4125  0.0040  0.0638  0.0648  0.0647  0.06
Clidat 1994   44  0.4456  0.0030  0.0929  0.1924  0.2826  0.23
Cohen 1997   58  0.3426  0.0060  0.0548  0.0526  0.3034  0.12
Cortot 1951   37  0.4654  0.0056  0.0456  0.0459  0.0463  0.04
Csalog 1996   17  0.5546  0.0017  0.1117  0.5226  0.3021  0.39
Czerny 1989   24  0.5127  0.0021  0.0920  0.4826  0.2822  0.37
Ezaki 2006   45  0.4328  0.0036  0.0541  0.0540  0.0652  0.05
Falvay 1989   6  0.597  0.065  0.1711  0.5921  0.3118  0.43
Fiorentino 1962   14  0.5620  0.0118  0.1115  0.5425  0.3419  0.43
Fliere 1977   13  0.5642  0.0025  0.1123  0.3911  0.4520  0.42
Fou 1978   21  0.5410  0.026  0.1312  0.5912  0.4611  0.52
Francois 1956   61  0.3059  0.0064  0.0265  0.0254  0.0465  0.03
Goldenweiser 1946   33  0.4735  0.0033  0.0933  0.0924  0.2532  0.15
Gornostaeva 1994   56  0.3665  0.0046  0.0454  0.0427  0.2738  0.10
Groot 1988   23  0.5324  0.0024  0.1221  0.4425  0.2923  0.36
Hatto 1993   15  0.5621  0.0114  0.1113  0.5717  0.4612  0.51
Hatto 1997   8  0.5917  0.0113  0.157  0.6212  0.508  0.56
Horszowski 1983   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Indjic 2001   3  0.6016  0.0111  0.124  0.6511  0.506  0.57
Katin 1996   16  0.5519  0.0126  0.1626  0.3733  0.1027  0.19
Kiepura 1999   43  0.4458  0.0052  0.0542  0.0535  0.0846  0.06
Korecka 1992   39  0.4634  0.0055  0.0457  0.0430  0.2536  0.10
Kushner 1990   48  0.4150  0.0044  0.0549  0.0536  0.0750  0.06
Lilamand 2001   10  0.5730  0.0010  0.116  0.6213  0.622  0.62
Luisada 1990   34  0.4744  0.0027  0.1527  0.3533  0.1028  0.19
Luisada 2008   47  0.4233  0.0041  0.0640  0.0645  0.0651  0.06
Lushtak 2004   4  0.603  0.093  0.181  0.688  0.535  0.60
Malcuzynski 1951   57  0.3645  0.0057  0.0362  0.0329  0.1745  0.07
Malcuzynski 1961   7  0.591  0.231  0.232  0.678  0.544  0.60
Magaloff 1977   52  0.4031  0.0049  0.0552  0.0537  0.0654  0.05
Magin 1975   36  0.4639  0.0032  0.0832  0.1546  0.0539  0.09
Meguri 1997   42  0.4447  0.0058  0.0359  0.0347  0.0561  0.04
Milkina 1970   29  0.5036  0.0039  0.0639  0.0635  0.0844  0.07
Mohovich 1999   5  0.5918  0.0112  0.145  0.6417  0.507  0.57
Nezu 2005   25  0.5157  0.0045  0.0550  0.0552  0.0556  0.05
Ohlsson 1999   53  0.4062  0.0050  0.0636  0.0638  0.0749  0.06
Olejniczak 1990   1  0.619  0.037  0.143  0.654  0.611  0.63
Osinska 1989   2  0.605  0.0619  0.1114  0.5623  0.3714  0.46
Perlemuter 1992   30  0.4938  0.0037  0.0547  0.0511  0.4931  0.16
Poblocka 1999   31  0.4848  0.0042  0.0834  0.0847  0.0643  0.07
Rangell 2001   50  0.4149  0.0053  0.0455  0.0451  0.0562  0.04
Richter 1960   20  0.5414  0.0115  0.1116  0.5418  0.4413  0.49
Richter 1961   22  0.538  0.059  0.1022  0.4317  0.4616  0.44
Rosen 1989   32  0.4832  0.0054  0.0453  0.0443  0.0657  0.05
Rubinstein 1939   54  0.3943  0.0051  0.0543  0.0547  0.0553  0.05
Rubinstein 1952   38  0.4641  0.0031  0.0731  0.1629  0.2129  0.18
Rubinstein 1966   11  0.572  0.152  0.198  0.6213  0.4610  0.53
Rudanovskaya 2007   18  0.5511  0.0229  0.0930  0.1837  0.0637  0.10
Shebanova 2002   28  0.5040  0.0028  0.1328  0.2938  0.0733  0.14
Smith 1975   49  0.4123  0.0048  0.0551  0.0538  0.0848  0.06
Sztompka 1959   46  0.4329  0.0034  0.0835  0.0822  0.3530  0.17
Tanyel 1992   41  0.4451  0.0035  0.0546  0.0530  0.1840  0.09
Tsujii 2005   27  0.5066  0.0043  0.0637  0.0651  0.0555  0.05
Uninsky 1959   19  0.5412  0.0116  0.1019  0.5116  0.4115  0.46
Vardi 1988   35  0.4722  0.0022  0.1124  0.3825  0.2425  0.30
Wasowski 1980   59  0.3255  0.0062  0.0361  0.0351  0.0559  0.04
Zimerman 1975   26  0.504  0.0820  0.0925  0.3824  0.3324  0.35
Random 1   64  0.0637  0.0065  0.0263  0.028  0.3841  0.09
Random 2   66  0.0164  0.0066  0.0166  0.0146  0.0466  0.02
Random 3   65  0.0152  0.0063  0.0264  0.0216  0.3742  0.09

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).