Lushtak 2004

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   63  0.2718  0.0137  0.0644  0.0641  0.0654  0.06
Ax 1995   60  0.3742  0.0057  0.0455  0.0452  0.0463  0.04
Bacha 1998   55  0.4540  0.0051  0.0458  0.0438  0.0657  0.05
Barbosa 1983   59  0.4054  0.0033  0.0642  0.0634  0.0950  0.07
BenOr 1989   11  0.6012  0.0111  0.129  0.4916  0.5011  0.49
Biret 1990   25  0.5848  0.0027  0.1021  0.2818  0.4021  0.33
Brailowsky 1960   61  0.3655  0.0060  0.0360  0.0353  0.0562  0.04
Chiu 1999   47  0.4964  0.0049  0.0646  0.0633  0.0949  0.07
Clidat 1994   33  0.558  0.0310  0.1614  0.449  0.569  0.50
Cohen 1997   58  0.4037  0.0053  0.0359  0.0310  0.5840  0.13
Cortot 1951   30  0.5629  0.0046  0.0736  0.0722  0.2045  0.12
Csalog 1996   13  0.6032  0.0018  0.0916  0.4132  0.1429  0.24
Czerny 1989   20  0.5830  0.0012  0.1411  0.4613  0.5210  0.49
Ezaki 2006   40  0.5228  0.0036  0.0547  0.0535  0.0752  0.06
Falvay 1989   3  0.6511  0.026  0.204  0.6116  0.3612  0.47
Fiorentino 1962   2  0.675  0.075  0.212  0.662  0.671  0.66
Fliere 1977   31  0.5653  0.0029  0.0728  0.1715  0.3826  0.25
Fou 1978   26  0.5743  0.0028  0.1026  0.2518  0.3123  0.28
Francois 1956   62  0.3666  0.0065  0.0265  0.0247  0.0565  0.03
Goldenweiser 1946   39  0.5347  0.0047  0.0834  0.0849  0.0553  0.06
Gornostaeva 1994   51  0.4614  0.0130  0.0630  0.1318  0.4827  0.25
Groot 1988   4  0.637  0.048  0.195  0.5912  0.507  0.54
Hatto 1993   17  0.5919  0.0119  0.0817  0.3623  0.3819  0.37
Hatto 1997   10  0.6138  0.0026  0.0824  0.2819  0.4020  0.33
Horszowski 1983   14  0.606  0.052  0.158  0.531  0.684  0.60
Indjic 2001   6  0.6244  0.0014  0.1012  0.4514  0.4713  0.46
Katin 1996   8  0.6113  0.0113  0.0913  0.4424  0.3418  0.39
Kiepura 1999   34  0.5552  0.0043  0.0833  0.0813  0.4830  0.20
Korecka 1992   38  0.5363  0.0056  0.0454  0.0421  0.4338  0.13
Kushner 1990   52  0.4623  0.0122  0.0829  0.1618  0.3628  0.24
Lilamand 2001   27  0.5727  0.0020  0.0919  0.3417  0.5516  0.43
Luisada 1990   12  0.6026  0.009  0.177  0.5510  0.575  0.56
Luisada 2008   41  0.5125  0.0034  0.0737  0.0722  0.3134  0.15
Lushtak 2004   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Malcuzynski 1951   57  0.4162  0.0062  0.0362  0.0352  0.0564  0.04
Malcuzynski 1961   22  0.5833  0.0025  0.0723  0.2826  0.2424  0.26
Magaloff 1977   48  0.4858  0.0055  0.0549  0.0536  0.0660  0.05
Magin 1975   7  0.624  0.087  0.176  0.576  0.546  0.55
Meguri 1997   18  0.5917  0.0141  0.0740  0.0716  0.4732  0.18
Milkina 1970   32  0.5645  0.0031  0.0631  0.1234  0.0946  0.10
Mohovich 1999   23  0.5861  0.0024  0.0825  0.2824  0.3122  0.29
Nezu 2005   24  0.5815  0.0145  0.0739  0.0726  0.2143  0.12
Ohlsson 1999   46  0.4934  0.0050  0.0551  0.0552  0.0559  0.05
Olejniczak 1990   28  0.5750  0.0044  0.0738  0.0720  0.2836  0.14
Osinska 1989   1  0.673  0.083  0.193  0.654  0.662  0.65
Perlemuter 1992   45  0.4939  0.0058  0.0453  0.0416  0.4437  0.13
Poblocka 1999   9  0.6131  0.0016  0.0815  0.4216  0.4715  0.44
Rangell 2001   36  0.5441  0.0038  0.0735  0.0723  0.4433  0.18
Richter 1960   35  0.5410  0.0242  0.0645  0.0627  0.2541  0.12
Richter 1961   15  0.602  0.144  0.1910  0.488  0.588  0.53
Rosen 1989   42  0.5151  0.0059  0.0550  0.0534  0.0951  0.07
Rubinstein 1939   53  0.4524  0.0052  0.0552  0.0545  0.0556  0.05
Rubinstein 1952   49  0.4822  0.0121  0.1027  0.2321  0.2925  0.26
Rubinstein 1966   5  0.631  0.301  0.301  0.663  0.633  0.64
Rudanovskaya 2007   19  0.5935  0.0040  0.0741  0.0725  0.2142  0.12
Shebanova 2002   21  0.5820  0.0132  0.0632  0.1128  0.1935  0.14
Smith 1975   54  0.4546  0.0054  0.0456  0.0448  0.0655  0.05
Sztompka 1959   44  0.5057  0.0035  0.0643  0.0625  0.2739  0.13
Tanyel 1992   50  0.4736  0.0039  0.0548  0.0528  0.1947  0.10
Tsujii 2005   16  0.5949  0.0023  0.0622  0.2831  0.1331  0.19
Uninsky 1959   43  0.5160  0.0048  0.0457  0.0436  0.0758  0.05
Vardi 1988   37  0.5321  0.0117  0.1018  0.3517  0.4617  0.40
Wasowski 1980   56  0.4216  0.0161  0.0361  0.0347  0.0661  0.04
Zimerman 1975   29  0.579  0.0215  0.0920  0.338  0.6114  0.45
Random 1   64  0.1256  0.0063  0.0363  0.033  0.4944  0.12
Random 2   65  0.0559  0.0064  0.0264  0.0217  0.3848  0.09
Random 3   66  -0.0365  0.0066  0.0166  0.0154  0.0366  0.02

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).