Tanyel 1992

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   18  0.7114  0.017  0.1915  0.6045  0.0617  0.19
Ax 1995   38  0.6331  0.0035  0.0734  0.0741  0.0535  0.06
Bacha 1998   59  0.5751  0.0051  0.0545  0.0541  0.0642  0.05
Barbosa 1983   64  0.4923  0.0060  0.0554  0.0557  0.0546  0.05
BenOr 1989   16  0.7121  0.0016  0.1016  0.4833  0.1812  0.29
Biret 1990   8  0.768  0.0212  0.245  0.6842  0.0616  0.20
Brailowsky 1960   63  0.5256  0.0064  0.0549  0.0554  0.0450  0.04
Chiu 1999   54  0.5861  0.0061  0.0459  0.0453  0.0552  0.04
Clidat 1994   51  0.6057  0.0040  0.0540  0.0551  0.0460  0.04
Cohen 1997   50  0.6027  0.0029  0.0929  0.216  0.589  0.35
Cortot 1951   60  0.5758  0.0053  0.0461  0.0443  0.0563  0.04
Csalog 1996   10  0.7420  0.0014  0.1910  0.6433  0.1213  0.28
Czerny 1989   52  0.5934  0.0041  0.0552  0.0560  0.0454  0.04
Ezaki 2006   28  0.6748  0.0032  0.0832  0.1637  0.0726  0.11
Falvay 1989   19  0.719  0.0119  0.0818  0.4058  0.0423  0.13
Fiorentino 1962   11  0.7412  0.0115  0.2312  0.6222  0.298  0.42
Fliere 1977   24  0.6863  0.0045  0.0550  0.0558  0.0537  0.05
Fou 1978   33  0.6635  0.0024  0.0919  0.3943  0.0718  0.17
Francois 1956   62  0.5650  0.0062  0.0364  0.0364  0.0365  0.03
Goldenweiser 1946   49  0.6139  0.0025  0.0924  0.3440  0.0621  0.14
Gornostaeva 1994   39  0.6353  0.0039  0.0636  0.0659  0.0448  0.05
Groot 1988   14  0.7319  0.0023  0.0823  0.3754  0.0522  0.14
Hatto 1993   45  0.6252  0.0058  0.0637  0.0664  0.0362  0.04
Hatto 1997   47  0.6240  0.0057  0.0462  0.0463  0.0458  0.04
Horszowski 1983   31  0.6713  0.0118  0.0922  0.3752  0.0520  0.14
Indjic 2001   43  0.6341  0.0055  0.0457  0.0460  0.0461  0.04
Katin 1996   32  0.6629  0.0049  0.0543  0.0551  0.0545  0.05
Kiepura 1999   61  0.5633  0.0056  0.0460  0.0457  0.0449  0.04
Korecka 1992   53  0.5959  0.0059  0.0548  0.0560  0.0453  0.04
Kushner 1990   55  0.5864  0.0046  0.0456  0.0446  0.0557  0.04
Lilamand 2001   12  0.743  0.0810  0.206  0.684  0.673  0.67
Luisada 1990   7  0.7642  0.006  0.159  0.6544  0.0615  0.20
Luisada 2008   44  0.6345  0.0036  0.0541  0.0559  0.0459  0.04
Lushtak 2004   4  0.7722  0.008  0.164  0.7117  0.426  0.55
Malcuzynski 1951   56  0.5743  0.0038  0.0458  0.0452  0.0564  0.04
Malcuzynski 1961   40  0.6330  0.0031  0.1031  0.2056  0.0531  0.10
Magaloff 1977   17  0.7137  0.0022  0.0725  0.3261  0.0428  0.11
Magin 1975   30  0.6754  0.0042  0.0542  0.0556  0.0541  0.05
Meguri 1997   6  0.772  0.272  0.318  0.662  0.692  0.67
Milkina 1970   46  0.6236  0.0047  0.0638  0.0663  0.0443  0.05
Mohovich 1999   26  0.6828  0.0028  0.1221  0.3761  0.0329  0.11
Nezu 2005   15  0.727  0.0313  0.1811  0.6329  0.1810  0.34
Ohlsson 1999   37  0.6318  0.0054  0.0547  0.0557  0.0456  0.04
Olejniczak 1990   9  0.7511  0.019  0.1914  0.6021  0.337  0.44
Osinska 1989   5  0.7716  0.005  0.237  0.6630  0.1311  0.29
Perlemuter 1992   35  0.6546  0.0048  0.0544  0.0539  0.0538  0.05
Poblocka 1999   36  0.6565  0.0043  0.0639  0.0662  0.0439  0.05
Rangell 2001   13  0.7315  0.0011  0.2013  0.614  0.744  0.67
Richter 1960   27  0.675  0.0520  0.0828  0.2438  0.0527  0.11
Richter 1961   58  0.5725  0.0052  0.0455  0.0449  0.0551  0.04
Rosen 1989   3  0.794  0.073  0.273  0.769  0.555  0.65
Rubinstein 1939   34  0.6666  0.0033  0.0633  0.1158  0.0533  0.07
Rubinstein 1952   41  0.6367  0.0034  0.0735  0.0761  0.0536  0.06
Rubinstein 1966   20  0.7047  0.0026  0.1420  0.3760  0.0425  0.12
Rudanovskaya 2007   42  0.6324  0.0050  0.0546  0.0541  0.0547  0.05
Shebanova 2002   22  0.6938  0.0027  0.1226  0.2956  0.0624  0.13
Smith 1975   29  0.6732  0.0037  0.0553  0.0548  0.0640  0.05
Sztompka 1959   57  0.5744  0.0063  0.0363  0.0355  0.0555  0.04
Tanyel 1992   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Tsujii 2005   1  0.811  0.371  0.371  0.837  0.561  0.68
Uninsky 1959   23  0.6826  0.0030  0.0930  0.2155  0.0530  0.10
Vardi 1988   48  0.6255  0.0044  0.0551  0.0540  0.0644  0.05
Wasowski 1980   25  0.6810  0.0117  0.1017  0.4444  0.0619  0.16
Zimerman 1975   21  0.6917  0.0021  0.1027  0.2662  0.0432  0.10
Average   2  0.806  0.034  0.272  0.8155  0.0514  0.20
Random 1   66  0.0049  0.0066  0.0265  0.0222  0.2134  0.06
Random 2   67  -0.0260  0.0067  0.0167  0.0162  0.0267  0.01
Random 3   65  0.0362  0.0065  0.0266  0.0260  0.0366  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).