Rosen 1989

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   63  0.2212  0.0110  0.2221  0.5218  0.4614  0.49
Ax 1995   57  0.3633  0.0032  0.0931  0.1842  0.0632  0.10
Bacha 1998   58  0.3665  0.0062  0.0264  0.0266  0.0165  0.01
Barbosa 1983   62  0.2266  0.0045  0.0550  0.0560  0.0452  0.04
BenOr 1989   23  0.5625  0.0022  0.1519  0.5443  0.0622  0.18
Biret 1990   13  0.609  0.0114  0.2111  0.6517  0.4013  0.51
Brailowsky 1960   54  0.3920  0.0049  0.0457  0.0444  0.0643  0.05
Chiu 1999   45  0.4548  0.0046  0.0552  0.0544  0.0645  0.05
Clidat 1994   38  0.4835  0.0027  0.1329  0.3545  0.0629  0.14
Cohen 1997   48  0.4415  0.0040  0.0838  0.0822  0.3825  0.17
Cortot 1951   40  0.4755  0.0057  0.0648  0.0662  0.0356  0.04
Csalog 1996   18  0.5936  0.0023  0.1520  0.5356  0.0427  0.15
Czerny 1989   35  0.5140  0.0020  0.1023  0.4739  0.0720  0.18
Ezaki 2006   17  0.598  0.025  0.287  0.709  0.578  0.63
Falvay 1989   16  0.5931  0.0019  0.1017  0.5556  0.0523  0.17
Fiorentino 1962   26  0.5521  0.0036  0.0839  0.0858  0.0440  0.06
Fliere 1977   50  0.4357  0.0061  0.0261  0.0266  0.0164  0.01
Fou 1978   47  0.4443  0.0053  0.0741  0.0760  0.0348  0.05
Francois 1956   42  0.4727  0.0056  0.0642  0.0642  0.0641  0.06
Goldenweiser 1946   36  0.5028  0.0050  0.0456  0.0460  0.0451  0.04
Gornostaeva 1994   61  0.2359  0.0063  0.0262  0.0259  0.0363  0.02
Groot 1988   14  0.606  0.0217  0.1113  0.6332  0.1419  0.30
Hatto 1993   41  0.4744  0.0052  0.0649  0.0660  0.0355  0.04
Hatto 1997   33  0.5262  0.0044  0.0647  0.0660  0.0353  0.04
Horszowski 1983   39  0.4817  0.0041  0.0643  0.0653  0.0442  0.05
Indjic 2001   30  0.5358  0.0051  0.0553  0.0560  0.0354  0.04
Katin 1996   3  0.707  0.027  0.283  0.779  0.566  0.66
Kiepura 1999   20  0.5716  0.0024  0.1024  0.4416  0.4116  0.42
Korecka 1992   53  0.4045  0.0066  0.0166  0.0163  0.0266  0.01
Kushner 1990   52  0.4154  0.0039  0.0740  0.0744  0.0639  0.06
Lilamand 2001   11  0.6219  0.009  0.208  0.6815  0.607  0.64
Luisada 1990   27  0.5449  0.0016  0.1016  0.5543  0.0621  0.18
Luisada 2008   60  0.3232  0.0055  0.0455  0.0460  0.0358  0.03
Lushtak 2004   34  0.5152  0.0037  0.0934  0.0950  0.0537  0.07
Malcuzynski 1951   51  0.4241  0.0054  0.0554  0.0540  0.0650  0.05
Malcuzynski 1961   28  0.5422  0.0026  0.1026  0.4142  0.0724  0.17
Magaloff 1977   21  0.5718  0.0013  0.2415  0.588  0.5311  0.55
Magin 1975   43  0.4763  0.0042  0.0644  0.0660  0.0447  0.05
Meguri 1997   4  0.6911  0.016  0.276  0.742  0.723  0.73
Milkina 1970   15  0.6024  0.0029  0.1428  0.3749  0.0528  0.14
Mohovich 1999   19  0.5826  0.0025  0.1125  0.4359  0.0430  0.13
Nezu 2005   7  0.6651  0.0012  0.1914  0.605  0.5610  0.58
Ohlsson 1999   24  0.5623  0.0018  0.1022  0.5128  0.2018  0.32
Olejniczak 1990   22  0.5729  0.0031  0.1030  0.2134  0.0831  0.13
Osinska 1989   2  0.723  0.073  0.255  0.755  0.645  0.69
Perlemuter 1992   37  0.5037  0.0043  0.0645  0.0639  0.0638  0.06
Poblocka 1999   29  0.5350  0.0034  0.0935  0.0949  0.0534  0.07
Rangell 2001   1  0.731  0.641  0.631  0.861  0.851  0.85
Richter 1960   6  0.6714  0.008  0.254  0.767  0.644  0.70
Richter 1961   46  0.4453  0.0047  0.0551  0.0551  0.0544  0.05
Rosen 1989   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Rubinstein 1939   44  0.4730  0.0033  0.0837  0.0857  0.0346  0.05
Rubinstein 1952   56  0.3760  0.0058  0.0458  0.0462  0.0360  0.03
Rubinstein 1966   25  0.5642  0.0021  0.1518  0.5451  0.0526  0.16
Rudanovskaya 2007   10  0.6313  0.0030  0.0932  0.1760  0.0336  0.07
Shebanova 2002   12  0.612  0.104  0.1910  0.6711  0.559  0.61
Smith 1975   31  0.5234  0.0035  0.0836  0.0849  0.0635  0.07
Sztompka 1959   55  0.3864  0.0060  0.0360  0.0360  0.0357  0.03
Tanyel 1992   9  0.644  0.032  0.232  0.775  0.792  0.78
Tsujii 2005   5  0.675  0.0211  0.169  0.6825  0.2217  0.39
Uninsky 1959   8  0.6510  0.0115  0.1312  0.6412  0.4412  0.53
Vardi 1988   59  0.3456  0.0048  0.0646  0.0651  0.0549  0.05
Wasowski 1980   32  0.5238  0.0028  0.1027  0.3717  0.5015  0.43
Zimerman 1975   49  0.4339  0.0038  0.0933  0.0940  0.0733  0.08
Random 1   64  0.0046  0.0065  0.0265  0.0262  0.0262  0.02
Random 2   65  0.0061  0.0064  0.0263  0.0256  0.0361  0.02
Random 3   66  -0.0547  0.0059  0.0359  0.0355  0.0359  0.03

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).