Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   27  0.7215  0.0127  0.0823  0.2439  0.0729  0.13
Ax 1995   49  0.6541  0.0050  0.0459  0.0460  0.0463  0.04
Bacha 1998   28  0.7253  0.0016  0.0924  0.2149  0.0537  0.10
Barbosa 1983   29  0.7113  0.0126  0.0825  0.2127  0.2215  0.21
BenOr 1989   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Biret 1990   6  0.7720  0.0114  0.0812  0.4336  0.0820  0.19
Brailowsky 1960   48  0.6556  0.0051  0.0460  0.0445  0.0558  0.04
Chiu 1999   33  0.6918  0.0138  0.0642  0.0625  0.2034  0.11
Clidat 1994   50  0.6351  0.0049  0.0553  0.0543  0.0653  0.05
Cohen 1997   60  0.5446  0.0062  0.0461  0.0449  0.0562  0.04
Cortot 1951   37  0.6855  0.0047  0.0552  0.0512  0.3727  0.14
Csalog 1996   34  0.6959  0.0040  0.0647  0.0652  0.0551  0.05
Czerny 1989   56  0.6027  0.0043  0.0554  0.0551  0.0549  0.05
Ezaki 2006   22  0.7339  0.0033  0.0934  0.0931  0.1731  0.12
Falvay 1989   14  0.742  0.222  0.264  0.5524  0.325  0.42
Fiorentino 1962   16  0.7428  0.0031  0.0927  0.2056  0.0538  0.10
Fliere 1977   36  0.6833  0.0044  0.0646  0.0638  0.0641  0.06
Fou 1978   8  0.7626  0.0020  0.0817  0.3440  0.0726  0.15
Francois 1956   59  0.5560  0.0060  0.0649  0.0663  0.0364  0.04
Goldenweiser 1946   61  0.5465  0.0057  0.0643  0.0621  0.2332  0.12
Gornostaeva 1994   35  0.6825  0.0039  0.0739  0.0727  0.2430  0.13
Groot 1988   21  0.7436  0.0018  0.0614  0.3727  0.1711  0.25
Hatto 1993   12  0.7544  0.006  0.1410  0.4441  0.0723  0.18
Hatto 1997   13  0.7512  0.014  0.157  0.4633  0.0916  0.20
Horszowski 1983   52  0.6349  0.0028  0.0731  0.1610  0.2814  0.21
Indjic 2001   10  0.7535  0.005  0.129  0.4541  0.0722  0.18
Katin 1996   32  0.6943  0.0045  0.0645  0.0642  0.0643  0.06
Kiepura 1999   46  0.6534  0.0053  0.0457  0.0451  0.0557  0.04
Korecka 1992   44  0.6723  0.0048  0.0550  0.0536  0.0648  0.05
Kushner 1990   5  0.778  0.0211  0.075  0.533  0.533  0.53
Lilamand 2001   47  0.6542  0.0037  0.0835  0.0814  0.4518  0.19
Luisada 1990   24  0.7222  0.018  0.148  0.4616  0.414  0.43
Luisada 2008   2  0.796  0.027  0.182  0.5614  0.562  0.56
Lushtak 2004   1  0.811  0.391  0.381  0.699  0.641  0.66
Malcuzynski 1951   39  0.6830  0.0034  0.0837  0.0856  0.0545  0.06
Malcuzynski 1961   15  0.7411  0.0210  0.086  0.4938  0.0624  0.17
Magaloff 1977   19  0.7421  0.0125  0.0821  0.2627  0.2212  0.24
Magin 1975   17  0.7416  0.0124  0.0726  0.2131  0.1125  0.15
Meguri 1997   20  0.7450  0.0021  0.0916  0.356  0.466  0.40
Milkina 1970   41  0.6724  0.0041  0.0648  0.0652  0.0450  0.05
Mohovich 1999   53  0.6232  0.0055  0.0556  0.0554  0.0555  0.05
Nezu 2005   3  0.7817  0.0112  0.0813  0.4029  0.2010  0.28
Ohlsson 1999   30  0.6929  0.0035  0.0836  0.0841  0.0544  0.06
Olejniczak 1990   4  0.775  0.0413  0.0911  0.4323  0.259  0.33
Osinska 1989   26  0.723  0.069  0.1118  0.3148  0.0533  0.12
Perlemuter 1992   57  0.5954  0.0058  0.0740  0.0744  0.0542  0.06
Poblocka 1999   11  0.7540  0.0032  0.0929  0.1849  0.0636  0.10
Rangell 2001   9  0.7614  0.0119  0.0815  0.3717  0.447  0.40
Richter 1960   62  0.4957  0.0061  0.0463  0.0455  0.0560  0.04
Richter 1961   63  0.4663  0.0063  0.0551  0.0538  0.0646  0.05
Rosen 1989   55  0.6137  0.0056  0.0555  0.0558  0.0461  0.04
Rubinstein 1939   54  0.6247  0.0052  0.0458  0.0441  0.0647  0.05
Rubinstein 1952   43  0.6745  0.0042  0.0644  0.0660  0.0456  0.05
Rubinstein 1966   42  0.6731  0.0046  0.0738  0.0760  0.0452  0.05
Rudanovskaya 2007   58  0.5819  0.0159  0.0641  0.0655  0.0454  0.05
Shebanova 2002   31  0.6961  0.0022  0.0919  0.2844  0.0628  0.13
Smith 1975   38  0.6858  0.0036  0.1033  0.1029  0.1335  0.11
Sztompka 1959   45  0.6638  0.0015  0.0828  0.1824  0.2813  0.22
Tanyel 1992   25  0.727  0.0223  0.0820  0.2814  0.398  0.33
Tsujii 2005   7  0.7710  0.023  0.173  0.5543  0.0717  0.20
Uninsky 1959   40  0.6848  0.0029  0.0732  0.1448  0.0439  0.07
Vardi 1988   51  0.6362  0.0054  0.0462  0.0444  0.0559  0.04
Wasowski 1980   23  0.739  0.0230  0.0730  0.1727  0.1921  0.18
Zimerman 1975   18  0.744  0.0517  0.0722  0.2530  0.1519  0.19
Random 1   66  -0.1466  0.0066  0.0166  0.0165  0.0266  0.01
Random 2   64  0.0264  0.0064  0.0264  0.0219  0.2440  0.07
Random 3   65  -0.0252  0.0065  0.0265  0.0254  0.0365  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).