Cohen 1997

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   2  0.663  0.134  0.324  0.6655  0.055  0.18
Ashkenazy 1981   7  0.6137  0.009  0.117  0.5357  0.057  0.16
Beliavsky 2004   34  0.5520  0.0115  0.0713  0.3959  0.0418  0.12
BenOr 1989   9  0.6030  0.0028  0.0917  0.3450  0.0611  0.14
Biret 1990   8  0.6045  0.0025  0.0720  0.2858  0.0524  0.12
Blet 2003   6  0.6116  0.0121  0.0911  0.4045  0.068  0.15
Block 1995   15  0.5832  0.0035  0.0734  0.0752  0.0538  0.06
Brailowsky 1960   48  0.5351  0.0054  0.0454  0.0448  0.0642  0.05
Chiu 1999   31  0.5615  0.0137  0.0546  0.0555  0.0544  0.05
Clidat 1994   27  0.5633  0.0018  0.0824  0.2643  0.0621  0.12
Cohen 1997   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Coop 1987   21  0.5735  0.0022  0.0730  0.1861  0.0531  0.09
Cortot 1951   25  0.5719  0.0126  0.0729  0.2160  0.0432  0.09
Czerny 1949   52  0.5061  0.0050  0.0458  0.0462  0.0460  0.04
Czerny 1949b   58  0.4546  0.0057  0.0551  0.0557  0.0649  0.05
Ezaki 2006   20  0.5843  0.0040  0.0549  0.0562  0.0455  0.04
Falvay 1989   11  0.5924  0.0034  0.0636  0.0658  0.0446  0.05
Ferenczy 1958   49  0.5238  0.0059  0.0461  0.0449  0.0650  0.05
Fiorentino 1962   42  0.5464  0.0053  0.0550  0.0562  0.0463  0.04
Fliere 1977   30  0.5657  0.0041  0.0545  0.0550  0.0640  0.05
Fou 1978   45  0.5456  0.0038  0.0638  0.0652  0.0635  0.06
Francois 1956   56  0.4621  0.0145  0.0544  0.0561  0.0364  0.04
Hatto 1997   3  0.6511  0.013  0.242  0.7629  0.191  0.38
Horowitz 1971   50  0.5053  0.0033  0.0733  0.0755  0.0454  0.05
Horowitz 1985   61  0.3965  0.0062  0.0641  0.0648  0.0541  0.05
Indjic 2001   1  0.671  0.271  0.271  0.7829  0.172  0.36
Kapell 1951   44  0.5441  0.0048  0.0639  0.0650  0.0636  0.06
Kiepura 1999   23  0.5725  0.0013  0.0728  0.2337  0.0616  0.12
Kilenyi 1937   53  0.4963  0.0052  0.0460  0.0452  0.0651  0.05
Kissin 1993   24  0.5734  0.0010  0.149  0.4463  0.0413  0.13
Kitain 1937   62  0.3550  0.0061  0.0548  0.0546  0.0553  0.05
Kushner 1990   22  0.5714  0.0112  0.0814  0.3955  0.0419  0.12
Levy 1951   55  0.4847  0.0058  0.0453  0.0451  0.0645  0.05
Luisada 1990   36  0.5559  0.0051  0.0459  0.0461  0.0462  0.04
Lushtak 2004   19  0.5840  0.0032  0.0832  0.1561  0.0434  0.08
Lympany 1968   13  0.5931  0.0023  0.0719  0.3253  0.0512  0.13
Magaloff 1977   28  0.5610  0.0229  0.0823  0.2753  0.0614  0.13
Magaloff 1977b   29  0.5613  0.0130  0.1025  0.2654  0.0527  0.11
Magin 1975   39  0.5527  0.0055  0.0452  0.0449  0.0648  0.05
Milkina 1970   4  0.646  0.035  0.175  0.6530  0.143  0.30
Mohovich 1999   37  0.554  0.086  0.1115  0.3963  0.0328  0.11
Nadelmann 1956   14  0.589  0.0214  0.0716  0.3760  0.0420  0.12
Ohlsson 1999   40  0.5518  0.0146  0.0547  0.0557  0.0459  0.04
Olejniczac 1990   35  0.5555  0.0049  0.0457  0.0460  0.0461  0.04
Olejniczak 1991   32  0.5649  0.0042  0.0635  0.0661  0.0547  0.05
Osinska 1989   5  0.632  0.202  0.213  0.7358  0.046  0.17
Paderewski 1912   57  0.4629  0.0043  0.0640  0.0648  0.0637  0.06
Perahia 1994   54  0.498  0.0216  0.0726  0.2538  0.0622  0.12
Perlemuter 1986   43  0.5442  0.0019  0.0822  0.2761  0.0430  0.10
Poblocka 1999   18  0.5844  0.0036  0.0543  0.0562  0.0457  0.04
Rangell 2001   17  0.5812  0.0127  0.0821  0.2856  0.0523  0.12
Risler 1920   60  0.4248  0.0060  0.0462  0.0451  0.0643  0.05
Rosen 1989   41  0.5426  0.0056  0.0455  0.0446  0.0652  0.05
Rubinstein 1939   46  0.535  0.0411  0.0812  0.4031  0.124  0.22
Rubinstein 1952   12  0.5922  0.017  0.106  0.5561  0.049  0.15
Rubinstein 1966   10  0.6023  0.0017  0.0710  0.4262  0.0326  0.11
Rummel 1943   59  0.4260  0.0044  0.0637  0.0643  0.0639  0.06
Shebanova 2002   16  0.5839  0.0031  0.0731  0.1762  0.0433  0.08
Smith 1975   47  0.5328  0.0024  0.0827  0.2347  0.0617  0.12
Szpilman 1948   51  0.5052  0.0039  0.0542  0.0562  0.0456  0.04
Uninsky 1971   33  0.557  0.028  0.138  0.5160  0.0410  0.14
Wasowski 1980   26  0.5636  0.0020  0.0918  0.3259  0.0425  0.11
Weissenberg 1971   38  0.5517  0.0147  0.0456  0.0463  0.0458  0.04
Random 1    64  0.0154  0.0064  0.0364  0.0311  0.3329  0.10
Random 2   63  0.0562  0.0063  0.0363  0.032  0.5315  0.13
Random 3   65  -0.0158  0.0065  0.0265  0.0245  0.0465  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).