Random 1

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   30  0.0321  0.0127  0.0522  0.1362  0.0323  0.06
Ax 1995   47  0.0122  0.0138  0.0441  0.0466  0.0158  0.02
Bacha 1998   11  0.062  0.132  0.172  0.5156  0.042  0.14
Barbosa 1983   23  0.0436  0.0018  0.0515  0.2664  0.0215  0.07
BenOr 1989   10  0.0737  0.0014  0.0513  0.2864  0.0217  0.07
Biret 1990   18  0.0520  0.0140  0.0534  0.0565  0.0240  0.03
Brailowsky 1960   59  0.0065  0.0022  0.0527  0.1262  0.0225  0.05
Chiu 1999   31  0.0360  0.0042  0.0538  0.0564  0.0233  0.03
Clidat 1994   41  0.0244  0.0052  0.0537  0.0566  0.0153  0.02
Cohen 1997   29  0.0330  0.0039  0.0533  0.0562  0.0239  0.03
Cortot 1951   40  0.0239  0.0049  0.0352  0.0366  0.0161  0.02
Csalog 1996   46  0.0166  0.0051  0.0444  0.0466  0.0150  0.02
Czerny 1989   15  0.0561  0.0019  0.0618  0.2166  0.0127  0.05
Ezaki 2006   25  0.0412  0.0247  0.0350  0.0365  0.0242  0.02
Falvay 1989   8  0.0843  0.0024  0.0523  0.1364  0.0320  0.06
Fiorentino 1962   2  0.121  0.291  0.291  0.5660  0.034  0.13
Fliere 1977   49  0.0147  0.0023  0.0526  0.1264  0.0224  0.05
Fou 1978   37  0.0248  0.0031  0.0431  0.1066  0.0134  0.03
Francois 1956   63  -0.0253  0.0055  0.0263  0.0256  0.0364  0.02
Goldenweiser 1946   50  0.0123  0.0025  0.0420  0.1562  0.0314  0.07
Gornostaeva 1994   62  -0.0135  0.0044  0.0447  0.0466  0.0159  0.02
Groot 1988   28  0.0329  0.0045  0.0449  0.0465  0.0241  0.03
Hatto 1993   14  0.0640  0.0016  0.0514  0.2862  0.0218  0.07
Hatto 1997   16  0.0555  0.0017  0.0711  0.2963  0.0311  0.09
Horszowski 1983   12  0.063  0.097  0.178  0.3863  0.0210  0.09
Indjic 2001   33  0.0242  0.0028  0.0425  0.1264  0.0229  0.05
Katin 1996   36  0.0245  0.0050  0.0351  0.0366  0.0149  0.02
Kiepura 1999   19  0.0550  0.0029  0.0524  0.1358  0.0319  0.06
Korecka 1992   6  0.086  0.046  0.145  0.4450  0.051  0.15
Kushner 1990   35  0.0251  0.0043  0.0448  0.0465  0.0235  0.03
Lilamand 2001   21  0.0454  0.0020  0.0517  0.2264  0.0216  0.07
Luisada 1990   24  0.0449  0.0021  0.0519  0.1665  0.0222  0.06
Luisada 2008   61  -0.0158  0.0058  0.0360  0.0366  0.0152  0.02
Lushtak 2004   1  0.1213  0.023  0.163  0.4963  0.036  0.12
Malcuzynski 1951   56  0.005  0.0548  0.0353  0.0365  0.0262  0.02
Malcuzynski 1961   5  0.0825  0.0015  0.0512  0.2965  0.0213  0.08
Magaloff 1977   17  0.0527  0.009  0.119  0.3864  0.037  0.11
Magin 1975   3  0.1014  0.014  0.204  0.4864  0.035  0.12
Meguri 1997   27  0.034  0.0610  0.0629  0.1062  0.0231  0.04
Milkina 1970   52  0.0017  0.0160  0.0359  0.0366  0.0147  0.02
Mohovich 1999   43  0.0256  0.0033  0.0536  0.0566  0.0156  0.02
Nezu 2005   51  0.0034  0.0037  0.0439  0.0466  0.0154  0.02
Ohlsson 1999   60  -0.0141  0.0065  0.0264  0.0266  0.0165  0.01
Olejniczak 1990   4  0.099  0.035  0.116  0.4261  0.038  0.11
Osinska 1989   39  0.0218  0.0162  0.0356  0.0366  0.0144  0.02
Perlemuter 1992   57  0.0019  0.0161  0.0358  0.0365  0.0243  0.02
Poblocka 1999   22  0.0438  0.0034  0.0442  0.0466  0.0145  0.02
Rangell 2001   45  0.0164  0.0057  0.0357  0.0365  0.0260  0.02
Richter 1960   26  0.0457  0.0035  0.0440  0.0465  0.0236  0.03
Richter 1961   48  0.0162  0.0032  0.0532  0.0961  0.0326  0.05
Rosen 1989   53  0.0026  0.0063  0.0262  0.0265  0.0255  0.02
Rubinstein 1939   44  0.0224  0.0046  0.0443  0.0466  0.0146  0.02
Rubinstein 1952   34  0.0246  0.0041  0.0535  0.0566  0.0163  0.02
Rubinstein 1966   64  -0.0359  0.0053  0.0446  0.0466  0.0151  0.02
Rudanovskaya 2007   32  0.0316  0.0136  0.0445  0.0465  0.0238  0.03
Shebanova 2002   54  0.0063  0.0064  0.0265  0.0266  0.0166  0.01
Smith 1975   38  0.028  0.0326  0.0528  0.1159  0.0321  0.06
Sztompka 1959   20  0.0511  0.028  0.147  0.4154  0.053  0.14
Tanyel 1992   7  0.0815  0.0113  0.0716  0.2659  0.049  0.10
Tsujii 2005   42  0.027  0.0312  0.0621  0.1465  0.0228  0.05
Uninsky 1959   55  0.0052  0.0056  0.0361  0.0366  0.0148  0.02
Vardi 1988   13  0.0632  0.0030  0.0530  0.1065  0.0230  0.04
Wasowski 1980   58  0.0033  0.0059  0.0354  0.0362  0.0332  0.03
Zimerman 1975   9  0.0728  0.0011  0.0710  0.3062  0.0312  0.09
Random 1   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Random 2   65  -0.0331  0.0054  0.0355  0.0355  0.0337  0.03
Random 3   66  -0.0710  0.0366  0.0166  0.0146  0.0357  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).