Fou 1978

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   64  0.2035  0.0018  0.0630  0.1930  0.3026  0.24
Ax 1995   59  0.4414  0.0136  0.0934  0.0917  0.4728  0.21
Bacha 1998   46  0.4953  0.0039  0.0645  0.0615  0.3534  0.14
Barbosa 1983   49  0.4734  0.0013  0.1914  0.447  0.6112  0.52
BenOr 1989   6  0.6412  0.0110  0.197  0.619  0.577  0.59
Biret 1990   38  0.5321  0.0041  0.0739  0.0732  0.1442  0.10
Brailowsky 1960   48  0.4727  0.0046  0.0643  0.0620  0.3533  0.14
Chiu 1999   31  0.5436  0.0020  0.0820  0.3113  0.4219  0.36
Clidat 1994   60  0.4341  0.0055  0.0553  0.0557  0.0459  0.04
Cohen 1997   62  0.3939  0.0049  0.0741  0.0718  0.5230  0.19
Cortot 1951   9  0.6250  0.0028  0.0727  0.234  0.5322  0.35
Csalog 1996   20  0.5838  0.0034  0.0740  0.0755  0.0452  0.05
Czerny 1989   14  0.613  0.0512  0.185  0.638  0.584  0.60
Ezaki 2006   32  0.549  0.0135  0.0738  0.0735  0.0744  0.07
Falvay 1989   17  0.6011  0.0131  0.0829  0.1946  0.0540  0.10
Fiorentino 1962   11  0.6213  0.019  0.1910  0.565  0.5610  0.56
Fliere 1977   7  0.634  0.035  0.193  0.672  0.741  0.70
Fou 1978   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Francois 1956   55  0.4524  0.0060  0.0457  0.0440  0.0755  0.05
Goldenweiser 1946   40  0.5151  0.0050  0.0649  0.0644  0.0648  0.06
Gornostaeva 1994   30  0.5517  0.0021  0.0822  0.292  0.7016  0.45
Groot 1988   28  0.558  0.0127  0.0731  0.1838  0.0738  0.11
Hatto 1993   4  0.6510  0.014  0.198  0.607  0.616  0.60
Hatto 1997   12  0.6242  0.0014  0.2612  0.5011  0.5314  0.51
Horszowski 1983   34  0.5444  0.0011  0.1813  0.4613  0.5911  0.52
Indjic 2001   3  0.6625  0.008  0.249  0.589  0.588  0.58
Katin 1996   19  0.5958  0.0032  0.0733  0.1439  0.0836  0.11
Kiepura 1999   45  0.4964  0.0019  0.0628  0.2110  0.5423  0.34
Korecka 1992   23  0.5746  0.0038  0.0646  0.0615  0.5829  0.19
Kushner 1990   39  0.5229  0.0044  0.0648  0.0632  0.1443  0.09
Lilamand 2001   51  0.4631  0.0047  0.0647  0.0636  0.0847  0.07
Luisada 1990   15  0.612  0.083  0.1611  0.5610  0.579  0.56
Luisada 2008   27  0.566  0.0216  0.1515  0.437  0.5515  0.49
Lushtak 2004   22  0.5733  0.0023  0.0719  0.3127  0.2525  0.28
Malcuzynski 1951   54  0.4566  0.0052  0.0555  0.0528  0.2639  0.11
Malcuzynski 1961   10  0.627  0.012  0.186  0.626  0.585  0.60
Magaloff 1977   29  0.5519  0.0037  0.0935  0.0922  0.2831  0.16
Magin 1975   41  0.5163  0.0040  0.0650  0.0638  0.0749  0.06
Meguri 1997   50  0.4657  0.0064  0.0365  0.0355  0.0464  0.03
Milkina 1970   21  0.5845  0.0033  0.0732  0.1440  0.0741  0.10
Mohovich 1999   5  0.6418  0.007  0.202  0.674  0.673  0.67
Nezu 2005   35  0.5456  0.0056  0.0554  0.0559  0.0460  0.04
Ohlsson 1999   61  0.4132  0.0058  0.0556  0.0559  0.0458  0.04
Olejniczak 1990   2  0.6620  0.006  0.244  0.654  0.712  0.68
Osinska 1989   24  0.5661  0.0048  0.0836  0.0843  0.0645  0.07
Perlemuter 1992   53  0.4616  0.0059  0.0360  0.0336  0.0657  0.04
Poblocka 1999   16  0.605  0.0226  0.0825  0.2429  0.2027  0.22
Rangell 2001   44  0.5047  0.0051  0.0651  0.0653  0.0554  0.05
Richter 1960   42  0.5130  0.0045  0.0742  0.0746  0.0551  0.06
Richter 1961   26  0.5615  0.0022  0.0717  0.3512  0.5318  0.43
Rosen 1989   57  0.4460  0.0062  0.0361  0.0342  0.0661  0.04
Rubinstein 1939   37  0.5337  0.0042  0.0837  0.0837  0.0746  0.07
Rubinstein 1952   52  0.4662  0.0053  0.0458  0.0456  0.0562  0.04
Rubinstein 1966   36  0.5352  0.0017  0.0918  0.3238  0.0732  0.15
Rudanovskaya 2007   8  0.6326  0.0029  0.0823  0.2620  0.3624  0.31
Shebanova 2002   47  0.4954  0.0054  0.0652  0.0653  0.0553  0.05
Smith 1975   58  0.4440  0.0063  0.0362  0.0359  0.0463  0.03
Sztompka 1959   18  0.6028  0.0030  0.0824  0.2411  0.5420  0.36
Tanyel 1992   63  0.3465  0.0061  0.0363  0.0357  0.0465  0.03
Tsujii 2005   13  0.6148  0.0025  0.1021  0.3036  0.0735  0.14
Uninsky 1959   33  0.5459  0.0043  0.0644  0.0642  0.0650  0.06
Vardi 1988   25  0.5623  0.0015  0.1516  0.3614  0.5317  0.44
Wasowski 1980   56  0.4455  0.0057  0.0459  0.0454  0.0556  0.04
Zimerman 1975   43  0.5122  0.0024  0.0926  0.2315  0.5221  0.35
Average   1  0.761  0.661  0.651  0.8517  0.3213  0.52
Random 1   66  0.0243  0.0067  0.0167  0.0132  0.1066  0.03
Random 2   65  0.0749  0.0065  0.0364  0.0318  0.3737  0.11
Random 3   67  0.0067  0.0066  0.0266  0.0236  0.0567  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).