Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   45  0.6128  0.0049  0.0550  0.0560  0.0461  0.04
Ashkenazy 1981   23  0.6423  0.0034  0.0648  0.0655  0.0642  0.06
Beliavsky 2004   53  0.5960  0.0052  0.0555  0.0553  0.0546  0.05
BenOr 1989   2  0.732  0.072  0.444  0.6945  0.079  0.22
Biret 1990   38  0.6250  0.0040  0.0645  0.0652  0.0643  0.06
Blet 2003   26  0.6446  0.0028  0.0725  0.2149  0.0528  0.10
Block 1995   35  0.6358  0.0043  0.0639  0.0662  0.0450  0.05
Brailowsky 1960   24  0.643  0.079  0.2211  0.549  0.572  0.55
Chiu 1999   17  0.6524  0.0021  0.0723  0.3042  0.0818  0.15
Clidat 1994   13  0.6714  0.0013  0.1713  0.5135  0.0713  0.19
Cohen 1997   58  0.5432  0.0063  0.0646  0.0656  0.0454  0.05
Coop 1987   12  0.675  0.0316  0.1618  0.4156  0.0521  0.14
Cortot 1951   57  0.5555  0.0061  0.0361  0.0362  0.0465  0.03
Czerny 1949   40  0.6241  0.0036  0.0553  0.0555  0.0548  0.05
Czerny 1949b   42  0.6238  0.0042  0.0641  0.0655  0.0640  0.06
Ezaki 2006   4  0.714  0.045  0.307  0.6336  0.116  0.26
Falvay 1989   5  0.718  0.026  0.295  0.6556  0.0612  0.20
Ferenczy 1958   18  0.6519  0.0010  0.1312  0.544  0.591  0.56
Fiorentino 1962   15  0.6652  0.0018  0.1416  0.4457  0.0519  0.15
Fliere 1977   8  0.6935  0.0011  0.149  0.5542  0.0711  0.20
Fou 1978   7  0.6911  0.014  0.178  0.6237  0.097  0.24
Francois 1956   55  0.5821  0.0030  0.0731  0.1514  0.525  0.28
Hatto 1997   47  0.6118  0.0055  0.0554  0.0542  0.0647  0.05
Horowitz 1971   41  0.6212  0.0124  0.0824  0.2645  0.0526  0.11
Horowitz 1985   61  0.5237  0.0059  0.0362  0.0353  0.0556  0.04
Indjic 2001   48  0.6049  0.0057  0.0457  0.0444  0.0652  0.05
Kapell 1951   28  0.6443  0.0029  0.0727  0.2062  0.0333  0.08
Kiepura 1999   25  0.6434  0.0041  0.0640  0.0639  0.0636  0.06
Kilenyi 1937   27  0.6417  0.0023  0.0822  0.3055  0.0524  0.12
Kissin 1993   30  0.6445  0.0033  0.0549  0.0563  0.0460  0.04
Kitain 1937   63  0.4525  0.0060  0.0363  0.0341  0.0664  0.04
Kushner 1990   39  0.6248  0.0025  0.0826  0.2158  0.0429  0.09
Levy 1951   43  0.6136  0.0037  0.0551  0.0547  0.0645  0.05
Luisada 1990   34  0.6322  0.0046  0.1133  0.1156  0.0535  0.07
Lushtak 2004   29  0.6453  0.0038  0.0647  0.0655  0.0549  0.05
Lympany 1968   51  0.5933  0.0051  0.0835  0.0856  0.0537  0.06
Magaloff 1977   20  0.6547  0.0027  0.0729  0.1655  0.0531  0.09
Magaloff 1977b   22  0.6513  0.0126  0.0728  0.1951  0.0725  0.12
Magin 1975   31  0.6326  0.0045  0.1034  0.1048  0.0732  0.08
Milkina 1970   11  0.6751  0.0015  0.1414  0.5046  0.0616  0.17
Mohovich 1999   52  0.5966  0.0050  0.0644  0.0661  0.0453  0.05
Nadelmann 1956   46  0.6139  0.0048  0.0836  0.0860  0.0441  0.06
Ohlsson 1999   44  0.6116  0.0039  0.0643  0.0664  0.0359  0.04
Olejniczac 1990   16  0.6630  0.0019  0.1217  0.4147  0.0717  0.17
Olejniczak 1991   33  0.6365  0.0044  0.0837  0.0861  0.0539  0.06
Osinska 1989   3  0.7215  0.003  0.163  0.7047  0.078  0.22
Paderewski 1912   50  0.6029  0.0032  0.0732  0.1353  0.0534  0.08
Perahia 1994   62  0.5157  0.0062  0.0556  0.0548  0.0551  0.05
Perlemuter 1986   37  0.6340  0.0020  0.0721  0.3244  0.0622  0.14
Poblocka 1999   10  0.6842  0.0012  0.1310  0.5557  0.0515  0.17
Rangell 2001   49  0.6031  0.0054  0.0552  0.0559  0.0555  0.05
Risler 1920   59  0.5344  0.0053  0.0460  0.0457  0.0457  0.04
Rosen 1989   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Rubinstein 1939   56  0.5727  0.0056  0.0459  0.0452  0.0458  0.04
Rubinstein 1952   6  0.696  0.027  0.262  0.7230  0.164  0.34
Rubinstein 1966   9  0.6810  0.018  0.206  0.6319  0.333  0.46
Rummel 1943   60  0.5361  0.0058  0.0458  0.0445  0.0562  0.04
Shebanova 2002   19  0.6520  0.0014  0.1415  0.4842  0.0714  0.18
Smith 1975   21  0.6562  0.0022  0.0920  0.3455  0.0523  0.13
Szpilman 1948   54  0.5854  0.0047  0.0738  0.0754  0.0538  0.06
Uninsky 1971   36  0.6356  0.0031  0.0730  0.1650  0.0530  0.09
Wasowski 1980   32  0.637  0.0235  0.0642  0.0659  0.0444  0.05
Weissenberg 1971   14  0.669  0.0117  0.1319  0.3957  0.0520  0.14
Average   1  0.771  0.631  0.621  0.8959  0.0510  0.21
Random 1    65  0.0064  0.0064  0.0265  0.025  0.4727  0.10
Random 2   64  0.0159  0.0065  0.0264  0.0248  0.0366  0.02
Random 3   66  -0.0463  0.0066  0.0166  0.0129  0.1463  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).