Horowitz 1985

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   12  0.5911  0.017  0.166  0.5438  0.069  0.18
Ashkenazy 1981   24  0.5628  0.0032  0.0931  0.1764  0.0335  0.07
Beliavsky 2004   48  0.5113  0.0044  0.0936  0.0962  0.0437  0.06
BenOr 1989   19  0.5760  0.0027  0.0721  0.3162  0.0426  0.11
Biret 1990   3  0.625  0.014  0.175  0.6157  0.066  0.19
Blet 2003   23  0.5619  0.0017  0.1015  0.3957  0.0423  0.12
Block 1995   45  0.5121  0.0039  0.0641  0.0660  0.0456  0.05
Brailowsky 1960   20  0.5724  0.0025  0.0826  0.2446  0.0622  0.12
Chiu 1999   57  0.4920  0.0053  0.0642  0.0661  0.0442  0.05
Clidat 1994   36  0.5530  0.0030  0.0830  0.1863  0.0334  0.07
Cohen 1997   63  0.3944  0.0063  0.0549  0.0542  0.0558  0.05
Coop 1987   58  0.4952  0.0052  0.0461  0.0447  0.0648  0.05
Cortot 1951   42  0.5234  0.0049  0.0551  0.0557  0.0466  0.04
Czerny 1949   34  0.5536  0.0034  0.1035  0.1059  0.0533  0.07
Czerny 1949b   27  0.568  0.0113  0.1411  0.4852  0.0610  0.17
Ezaki 2006   52  0.5059  0.0054  0.0548  0.0553  0.0640  0.05
Falvay 1989   54  0.4945  0.0057  0.0557  0.0555  0.0643  0.05
Ferenczy 1958   56  0.4942  0.0047  0.0643  0.0658  0.0452  0.05
Fiorentino 1962   35  0.5565  0.0035  0.0547  0.0558  0.0559  0.05
Fliere 1977   10  0.5939  0.0015  0.1014  0.4061  0.0417  0.13
Fou 1978   46  0.5151  0.0045  0.0738  0.0761  0.0446  0.05
Francois 1956   62  0.4349  0.0062  0.0463  0.0448  0.0660  0.05
Hatto 1997   53  0.5066  0.0058  0.0555  0.0555  0.0551  0.05
Horowitz 1971   1  0.761  0.751  0.741  0.932  0.881  0.90
Horowitz 1985   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Indjic 2001   55  0.4957  0.0059  0.0560  0.0560  0.0557  0.05
Kapell 1951   41  0.5346  0.0033  0.1034  0.1057  0.0436  0.06
Kiepura 1999   8  0.593  0.0210  0.1419  0.3355  0.0516  0.13
Kilenyi 1937   21  0.5618  0.0023  0.0724  0.2760  0.0428  0.10
Kissin 1993   14  0.5814  0.0012  0.148  0.5361  0.0413  0.15
Kitain 1937   47  0.5112  0.0021  0.0820  0.317  0.553  0.41
Kushner 1990   39  0.5461  0.0022  0.0927  0.2349  0.0524  0.11
Levy 1951   18  0.5715  0.0016  0.1016  0.3942  0.0612  0.15
Luisada 1990   33  0.5527  0.0042  0.0739  0.0760  0.0455  0.05
Lushtak 2004   32  0.5510  0.0129  0.0829  0.2053  0.0529  0.10
Lympany 1968   44  0.5233  0.0046  0.0837  0.0844  0.0632  0.07
Magaloff 1977   30  0.5647  0.0040  0.0645  0.0660  0.0454  0.05
Magaloff 1977b   28  0.5640  0.0037  0.0552  0.0563  0.0364  0.04
Magin 1975   31  0.5517  0.0036  0.0550  0.0560  0.0462  0.04
Milkina 1970   25  0.5653  0.0031  0.0928  0.2154  0.0527  0.10
Mohovich 1999   22  0.5626  0.0026  0.0823  0.2854  0.0425  0.11
Nadelmann 1956   4  0.614  0.013  0.153  0.6349  0.065  0.19
Ohlsson 1999   51  0.5135  0.0050  0.0556  0.0555  0.0549  0.05
Olejniczac 1990   26  0.5650  0.0028  0.0732  0.1655  0.0531  0.09
Olejniczak 1991   38  0.5441  0.0041  0.0640  0.0663  0.0444  0.05
Osinska 1989   7  0.5938  0.008  0.147  0.5462  0.0411  0.15
Paderewski 1912   37  0.5423  0.0043  0.1133  0.1164  0.0338  0.06
Perahia 1994   9  0.5922  0.009  0.169  0.5121  0.342  0.42
Perlemuter 1986   50  0.5162  0.0056  0.0559  0.0546  0.0650  0.05
Poblocka 1999   40  0.5316  0.0048  0.0644  0.0655  0.0541  0.05
Rangell 2001   59  0.4848  0.0055  0.0554  0.0562  0.0465  0.04
Risler 1920   61  0.4543  0.0061  0.0546  0.0556  0.0461  0.04
Rosen 1989   43  0.5231  0.0051  0.0553  0.0562  0.0363  0.04
Rubinstein 1939   6  0.606  0.015  0.1812  0.4729  0.134  0.25
Rubinstein 1952   17  0.5737  0.0024  0.0922  0.2937  0.0621  0.13
Rubinstein 1966   15  0.5756  0.0019  0.0918  0.3346  0.0519  0.13
Rummel 1943   29  0.5632  0.0018  0.0925  0.2655  0.0430  0.10
Shebanova 2002   60  0.4754  0.0060  0.0462  0.0450  0.0653  0.05
Smith 1975   5  0.609  0.016  0.164  0.6256  0.057  0.18
Szpilman 1948   16  0.5729  0.0020  0.0813  0.4462  0.0418  0.13
Uninsky 1971   13  0.587  0.0111  0.1210  0.4859  0.0415  0.14
Wasowski 1980   11  0.5925  0.0014  0.1217  0.3857  0.0514  0.14
Weissenberg 1971   49  0.5155  0.0038  0.0558  0.0559  0.0545  0.05
Average   2  0.672  0.112  0.572  0.8461  0.048  0.18
Random 1    66  -0.0264  0.0065  0.0265  0.0227  0.1447  0.05
Random 2   64  0.0658  0.0064  0.0464  0.0413  0.4120  0.13
Random 3   65  0.0063  0.0066  0.0166  0.0113  0.4039  0.06
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).