Zimerman 1975

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   52  0.3814  0.017  0.1513  0.5311  0.588  0.55
Ax 1995   30  0.488  0.028  0.1616  0.5010  0.599  0.54
Bacha 1998   56  0.3551  0.0045  0.0646  0.0642  0.0550  0.05
Barbosa 1983   42  0.4322  0.0016  0.1021  0.4423  0.3715  0.40
BenOr 1989   29  0.4857  0.0030  0.0930  0.2438  0.0834  0.14
Biret 1990   16  0.5231  0.0019  0.1018  0.4626  0.2917  0.37
Brailowsky 1960   61  0.2941  0.0059  0.0548  0.0551  0.0549  0.05
Chiu 1999   49  0.4044  0.0057  0.0459  0.0454  0.0557  0.04
Clidat 1994   54  0.3737  0.0050  0.0455  0.0456  0.0559  0.04
Cohen 1997   58  0.3420  0.0051  0.0551  0.0528  0.3036  0.12
Cortot 1951   19  0.5043  0.0033  0.0733  0.1325  0.1928  0.16
Csalog 1996   28  0.4829  0.0034  0.0740  0.0758  0.0452  0.05
Czerny 1989   22  0.5017  0.0124  0.0926  0.3333  0.1725  0.24
Ezaki 2006   25  0.4921  0.0021  0.1122  0.4032  0.2023  0.28
Falvay 1989   2  0.617  0.033  0.283  0.7513  0.456  0.58
Fiorentino 1962   12  0.5716  0.0112  0.2110  0.6020  0.4210  0.50
Fliere 1977   26  0.4913  0.0123  0.1220  0.4522  0.2719  0.35
Fou 1978   18  0.5136  0.0015  0.0915  0.5226  0.2320  0.35
Francois 1956   63  0.2849  0.0066  0.0266  0.0263  0.0267  0.02
Goldenweiser 1946   47  0.4160  0.0048  0.0549  0.0551  0.0548  0.05
Gornostaeva 1994   48  0.4039  0.0043  0.0739  0.0726  0.2933  0.14
Groot 1988   27  0.4847  0.0038  0.0935  0.0943  0.0641  0.07
Hatto 1993   5  0.594  0.065  0.215  0.6810  0.545  0.61
Hatto 1997   9  0.5718  0.0113  0.1412  0.5721  0.3713  0.46
Horszowski 1983   20  0.506  0.0425  0.0925  0.3326  0.3818  0.35
Indjic 2001   7  0.5830  0.009  0.166  0.6410  0.517  0.57
Katin 1996   23  0.5042  0.0029  0.1027  0.3040  0.0731  0.14
Kiepura 1999   32  0.4745  0.0028  0.0828  0.2624  0.3222  0.29
Korecka 1992   4  0.5910  0.0111  0.187  0.633  0.753  0.69
Kushner 1990   64  0.2863  0.0061  0.0362  0.0364  0.0265  0.02
Lilamand 2001   13  0.5412  0.0117  0.1214  0.5323  0.4612  0.49
Luisada 1990   24  0.4958  0.0022  0.1019  0.4654  0.0529  0.15
Luisada 2008   34  0.4726  0.0031  0.0931  0.2133  0.1032  0.14
Lushtak 2004   11  0.5727  0.0014  0.159  0.6121  0.3314  0.45
Malcuzynski 1951   59  0.3465  0.0060  0.0361  0.0358  0.0463  0.03
Malcuzynski 1961   36  0.4638  0.0041  0.0837  0.0857  0.0442  0.06
Magaloff 1977   53  0.3846  0.0056  0.0460  0.0462  0.0362  0.03
Magin 1975   6  0.5815  0.0110  0.2111  0.5918  0.4111  0.49
Meguri 1997   21  0.5028  0.0027  0.0929  0.2526  0.3024  0.27
Milkina 1970   45  0.4154  0.0052  0.0456  0.0460  0.0361  0.03
Mohovich 1999   31  0.4759  0.0035  0.0742  0.0748  0.0545  0.06
Nezu 2005   17  0.529  0.0132  0.0832  0.1732  0.1330  0.15
Ohlsson 1999   51  0.3824  0.0054  0.0553  0.0555  0.0458  0.04
Olejniczak 1990   33  0.4766  0.0039  0.1034  0.1028  0.1835  0.13
Osinska 1989   14  0.5319  0.0026  0.1324  0.3527  0.2821  0.31
Perlemuter 1992   46  0.4134  0.0049  0.0458  0.0429  0.1538  0.08
Poblocka 1999   43  0.4256  0.0053  0.0552  0.0558  0.0456  0.04
Rangell 2001   44  0.4250  0.0042  0.0643  0.0642  0.0646  0.06
Richter 1960   39  0.4423  0.0040  0.0936  0.0943  0.0640  0.07
Richter 1961   3  0.613  0.102  0.302  0.752  0.712  0.73
Rosen 1989   40  0.4325  0.0044  0.0741  0.0734  0.0939  0.08
Rubinstein 1939   41  0.435  0.0420  0.1123  0.3630  0.1526  0.23
Rubinstein 1952   55  0.3764  0.0055  0.0457  0.0453  0.0560  0.04
Rubinstein 1966   38  0.4562  0.0037  0.0738  0.0753  0.0544  0.06
Rudanovskaya 2007   37  0.4553  0.0046  0.0647  0.0652  0.0454  0.05
Shebanova 2002   35  0.4732  0.0036  0.0645  0.0652  0.0553  0.05
Smith 1975   62  0.2952  0.0065  0.0265  0.0264  0.0264  0.02
Sztompka 1959   57  0.3448  0.0058  0.0550  0.0538  0.0743  0.06
Tanyel 1992   8  0.582  0.144  0.284  0.691  0.821  0.75
Tsujii 2005   15  0.5340  0.0018  0.1317  0.4948  0.0627  0.17
Uninsky 1959   50  0.3933  0.0047  0.0644  0.0648  0.0551  0.05
Vardi 1988   10  0.5711  0.016  0.168  0.639  0.634  0.63
Wasowski 1980   60  0.3035  0.0062  0.0454  0.0443  0.0747  0.05
Zimerman 1975   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Average   1  0.651  0.441  0.441  0.8432  0.1616  0.37
Random 1   65  0.0761  0.0063  0.0363  0.0310  0.3037  0.09
Random 2   67  0.0067  0.0067  0.0167  0.0155  0.0366  0.02
Random 3   66  0.0055  0.0064  0.0264  0.0225  0.1555  0.05

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).