Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   32  0.6231  0.0017  0.1616  0.4448  0.0713  0.18
Ax 1995   17  0.644  0.045  0.2710  0.5542  0.077  0.20
Bacha 1998   36  0.6142  0.0029  0.0830  0.1853  0.0532  0.09
Barbosa 1983   47  0.573  0.0613  0.1022  0.3256  0.0520  0.13
BenOr 1989   20  0.6410  0.0228  0.0826  0.2635  0.0917  0.15
Biret 1990   19  0.6419  0.0021  0.0821  0.3358  0.0523  0.13
Brailowsky 1960   43  0.5950  0.0039  0.0936  0.0944  0.0735  0.08
Chiu 1999   60  0.5351  0.0059  0.0364  0.0362  0.0465  0.03
Clidat 1994   55  0.5634  0.0051  0.0460  0.0456  0.0561  0.04
Cohen 1997   63  0.4725  0.0063  0.0645  0.0645  0.0556  0.05
Cortot 1951   61  0.5358  0.0061  0.0455  0.0452  0.0464  0.04
Csalog 1996   40  0.6038  0.0047  0.0451  0.0436  0.0753  0.05
Czerny 1989   35  0.6126  0.0034  0.0840  0.0858  0.0538  0.06
Ezaki 2006   18  0.6416  0.0033  0.0937  0.0959  0.0437  0.06
Falvay 1989   8  0.6811  0.0110  0.136  0.6458  0.0415  0.16
Fiorentino 1962   25  0.638  0.0227  0.0929  0.1947  0.0726  0.12
Fliere 1977   29  0.6345  0.0026  0.0727  0.2543  0.0624  0.12
Fou 1978   22  0.6415  0.009  0.1212  0.5037  0.095  0.21
Francois 1956   57  0.5430  0.0045  0.0548  0.0556  0.0557  0.05
Goldenweiser 1946   54  0.5666  0.0048  0.0457  0.0438  0.0748  0.05
Gornostaeva 1994   50  0.5718  0.0042  0.0741  0.0755  0.0545  0.06
Groot 1988   21  0.6420  0.0025  0.0724  0.2861  0.0527  0.12
Hatto 1993   6  0.6832  0.007  0.125  0.6657  0.0514  0.18
Hatto 1997   7  0.6837  0.0011  0.178  0.6360  0.0511  0.18
Horszowski 1983   51  0.5752  0.0052  0.0454  0.0436  0.0747  0.05
Indjic 2001   5  0.6813  0.018  0.127  0.6460  0.0512  0.18
Katin 1996   34  0.6133  0.0040  0.0743  0.0758  0.0540  0.06
Kiepura 1999   28  0.6314  0.0016  0.1414  0.4615  0.443  0.45
Korecka 1992   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Kushner 1990   41  0.6027  0.0037  0.1034  0.1056  0.0441  0.06
Lilamand 2001   62  0.5149  0.0060  0.0363  0.0355  0.0659  0.04
Luisada 1990   27  0.6343  0.0030  0.0828  0.2157  0.0530  0.10
Luisada 2008   30  0.6348  0.0035  0.0935  0.0941  0.0736  0.08
Lushtak 2004   26  0.6329  0.0036  0.1033  0.1061  0.0443  0.06
Malcuzynski 1951   33  0.6217  0.0014  0.1017  0.3747  0.0518  0.14
Malcuzynski 1961   16  0.6540  0.0015  0.1213  0.4657  0.0516  0.15
Magaloff 1977   52  0.5728  0.0054  0.0459  0.0457  0.0560  0.04
Magin 1975   1  0.741  0.531  0.521  0.8016  0.462  0.61
Meguri 1997   48  0.5746  0.0057  0.0547  0.0553  0.0552  0.05
Milkina 1970   14  0.659  0.0212  0.1411  0.5241  0.079  0.19
Mohovich 1999   13  0.6524  0.0023  0.1119  0.3660  0.0425  0.12
Nezu 2005   15  0.6535  0.0032  0.0831  0.1554  0.0633  0.09
Ohlsson 1999   31  0.627  0.0220  0.0923  0.2860  0.0428  0.11
Olejniczak 1990   11  0.6612  0.0119  0.0920  0.3546  0.0619  0.14
Osinska 1989   2  0.7122  0.004  0.233  0.6958  0.058  0.19
Perlemuter 1992   45  0.5841  0.0056  0.0644  0.0653  0.0449  0.05
Poblocka 1999   9  0.6739  0.0018  0.1615  0.4536  0.096  0.20
Rangell 2001   46  0.5764  0.0055  0.0453  0.0458  0.0463  0.04
Richter 1960   59  0.5462  0.0058  0.0461  0.0446  0.0654  0.05
Richter 1961   58  0.5436  0.0049  0.0458  0.0445  0.0650  0.05
Rosen 1989   44  0.5861  0.0053  0.0546  0.0561  0.0462  0.04
Rubinstein 1939   49  0.5744  0.0044  0.0549  0.0563  0.0458  0.04
Rubinstein 1952   39  0.6055  0.0038  0.0838  0.0863  0.0446  0.06
Rubinstein 1966   23  0.6421  0.0022  0.0918  0.3657  0.0521  0.13
Rudanovskaya 2007   56  0.5554  0.0062  0.0456  0.0445  0.0655  0.05
Shebanova 2002   37  0.6057  0.0046  0.0550  0.0545  0.0742  0.06
Smith 1975   53  0.5753  0.0050  0.0452  0.0450  0.0651  0.05
Sztompka 1959   4  0.695  0.043  0.344  0.688  0.591  0.63
Tanyel 1992   38  0.6063  0.0043  0.0839  0.0858  0.0444  0.06
Tsujii 2005   12  0.6647  0.0024  0.0825  0.2758  0.0622  0.13
Uninsky 1959   10  0.676  0.036  0.119  0.5943  0.0610  0.19
Vardi 1988   42  0.5959  0.0041  0.0742  0.0757  0.0539  0.06
Wasowski 1980   24  0.6423  0.0031  0.0732  0.1545  0.0631  0.09
Zimerman 1975   3  0.702  0.122  0.272  0.7831  0.174  0.36
Random 1   65  0.0056  0.0065  0.0265  0.028  0.3934  0.09
Random 2   66  0.0065  0.0066  0.0166  0.0150  0.0466  0.02
Random 3   64  0.0360  0.0064  0.0362  0.039  0.4329  0.11

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).