Csalog 1996

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   31  0.7312  0.019  0.1116  0.4515  0.4012  0.42
Ax 1995   62  0.594  0.0359  0.0462  0.0429  0.1651  0.08
Bacha 1998   53  0.6754  0.0037  0.0648  0.0654  0.0457  0.05
Barbosa 1983   54  0.6417  0.0141  0.0934  0.0930  0.1836  0.13
BenOr 1989   21  0.7711  0.017  0.1110  0.496  0.644  0.56
Biret 1990   11  0.787  0.0118  0.1213  0.4822  0.2815  0.37
Brailowsky 1960   50  0.6852  0.0050  0.0553  0.0530  0.1648  0.09
Chiu 1999   34  0.7341  0.0040  0.0935  0.0914  0.2829  0.16
Clidat 1994   29  0.7440  0.0015  0.0919  0.4111  0.6010  0.50
Cohen 1997   63  0.5834  0.0056  0.0461  0.0419  0.3740  0.12
Cortot 1951   59  0.6053  0.0060  0.0651  0.0644  0.0462  0.05
Csalog 1996   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Czerny 1989   48  0.6824  0.0048  0.0554  0.0531  0.2044  0.10
Ezaki 2006   41  0.7146  0.0053  0.0646  0.0631  0.1546  0.09
Falvay 1989   14  0.7833  0.0020  0.1221  0.3637  0.0730  0.16
Fiorentino 1962   15  0.7757  0.0023  0.0828  0.2117  0.4022  0.29
Fliere 1977   20  0.7716  0.0135  0.0838  0.0828  0.1738  0.12
Fou 1978   43  0.7028  0.0028  0.1027  0.2435  0.0834  0.14
Francois 1956   60  0.6065  0.0062  0.0463  0.0447  0.0566  0.04
Goldenweiser 1946   47  0.6936  0.0022  0.0923  0.336  0.4813  0.40
Gornostaeva 1994   42  0.7151  0.0043  0.0745  0.0730  0.2337  0.13
Groot 1988   2  0.825  0.022  0.292  0.655  0.602  0.62
Hatto 1993   24  0.7631  0.0031  0.0631  0.1537  0.0843  0.11
Hatto 1997   23  0.7638  0.0026  0.1022  0.3542  0.0731  0.16
Horszowski 1983   49  0.6810  0.0127  0.1026  0.2726  0.2126  0.24
Indjic 2001   25  0.7548  0.0030  0.0829  0.1936  0.0839  0.12
Katin 1996   6  0.7947  0.0013  0.086  0.5112  0.528  0.51
Kiepura 1999   64  0.5160  0.0064  0.0557  0.0540  0.0556  0.05
Korecka 1992   61  0.6067  0.0063  0.0558  0.0558  0.0464  0.04
Kushner 1990   57  0.6158  0.0051  0.0743  0.0747  0.0555  0.06
Lilamand 2001   39  0.719  0.0129  0.0830  0.185  0.5519  0.31
Luisada 1990   16  0.7722  0.0012  0.129  0.5031  0.1721  0.29
Luisada 2008   37  0.7239  0.0039  0.0836  0.0837  0.1049  0.09
Lushtak 2004   18  0.7713  0.0125  0.0925  0.2920  0.3817  0.33
Malcuzynski 1951   56  0.6215  0.0147  0.0556  0.0532  0.1352  0.08
Malcuzynski 1961   38  0.7135  0.0010  0.0918  0.4229  0.1525  0.25
Magaloff 1977   33  0.7342  0.0045  0.0555  0.0538  0.0660  0.05
Magin 1975   36  0.7232  0.0044  0.0837  0.0845  0.0654  0.07
Meguri 1997   32  0.7337  0.0036  0.0647  0.0614  0.4627  0.17
Milkina 1970   45  0.6955  0.0049  0.0552  0.0545  0.0558  0.05
Mohovich 1999   12  0.788  0.018  0.105  0.517  0.633  0.57
Nezu 2005   13  0.783  0.065  0.148  0.508  0.546  0.52
Ohlsson 1999   5  0.7923  0.0016  0.1014  0.4624  0.3214  0.38
Olejniczak 1990   7  0.7966  0.0011  0.1111  0.486  0.577  0.52
Osinska 1989   19  0.7730  0.0033  0.0732  0.1342  0.0647  0.09
Perlemuter 1992   44  0.7063  0.0052  0.0559  0.057  0.4033  0.14
Poblocka 1999   10  0.7825  0.0017  0.1115  0.4521  0.2816  0.35
Rangell 2001   46  0.6929  0.0054  0.0740  0.0720  0.3232  0.15
Richter 1960   51  0.6856  0.0055  0.0560  0.0543  0.0559  0.05
Richter 1961   58  0.6126  0.0061  0.0364  0.0343  0.0663  0.04
Rosen 1989   8  0.7949  0.006  0.147  0.517  0.565  0.53
Rubinstein 1939   28  0.7420  0.0034  0.0744  0.0731  0.1641  0.11
Rubinstein 1952   27  0.7419  0.0021  0.1317  0.4330  0.1923  0.29
Rubinstein 1966   17  0.7727  0.0024  0.0924  0.3056  0.0442  0.11
Rudanovskaya 2007   35  0.7359  0.0046  0.0649  0.068  0.5128  0.17
Shebanova 2002   9  0.7814  0.014  0.154  0.5216  0.509  0.51
Smith 1975   3  0.812  0.083  0.293  0.581  0.761  0.66
Sztompka 1959   30  0.7461  0.0042  0.0650  0.0620  0.2835  0.13
Tanyel 1992   26  0.7444  0.0032  0.0633  0.1210  0.6424  0.28
Tsujii 2005   4  0.8050  0.0014  0.0920  0.3926  0.2520  0.31
Uninsky 1959   22  0.766  0.0119  0.1012  0.4827  0.2218  0.32
Vardi 1988   55  0.6221  0.0057  0.0742  0.0729  0.1445  0.10
Wasowski 1980   40  0.7143  0.0038  0.0839  0.0842  0.0753  0.07
Zimerman 1975   52  0.6718  0.0158  0.0741  0.0756  0.0461  0.05
Average   1  0.871  0.651  0.641  0.8726  0.2211  0.44
Random 1   67  -0.0564  0.0067  0.0167  0.0166  0.0267  0.01
Random 2   66  0.0562  0.0066  0.0266  0.0217  0.3050  0.08
Random 3   65  0.0745  0.0065  0.0365  0.0340  0.0565  0.04

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).