Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   2  0.891  0.461  0.451  0.712  0.661  0.68
Ax 1995   34  0.7915  0.0141  0.0555  0.0521  0.3042  0.12
Bacha 1998   41  0.7742  0.0042  0.0637  0.0619  0.3935  0.15
Barbosa 1983   57  0.6863  0.0053  0.0636  0.0651  0.0561  0.05
BenOr 1989   54  0.6841  0.0052  0.0638  0.0646  0.0657  0.06
Biret 1990   32  0.7951  0.0037  0.0551  0.0534  0.0953  0.07
Brailowsky 1960   16  0.8212  0.0117  0.1118  0.314  0.5015  0.39
Chiu 1999   43  0.7714  0.0147  0.0641  0.0624  0.2144  0.11
Clidat 1994   11  0.8435  0.0014  0.1014  0.3710  0.5912  0.47
Cohen 1997   58  0.6561  0.0060  0.0460  0.0428  0.2447  0.10
Cortot 1951   62  0.5853  0.0062  0.0543  0.0526  0.1750  0.09
Csalog 1996   14  0.8336  0.0032  0.0732  0.1314  0.4129  0.23
Czerny 1989   47  0.7649  0.0039  0.0462  0.0424  0.3541  0.12
Ezaki 2006   22  0.8127  0.0040  0.0458  0.0424  0.3143  0.11
Falvay 1989   15  0.825  0.043  0.208  0.5011  0.4910  0.49
Fiorentino 1962   3  0.877  0.026  0.183  0.576  0.642  0.60
Fliere 1977   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Fou 1978   36  0.7834  0.0023  0.0927  0.2322  0.3025  0.26
Francois 1956   45  0.769  0.0225  0.0831  0.1512  0.4627  0.26
Goldenweiser 1946   63  0.5344  0.0063  0.0544  0.0550  0.0559  0.05
Gornostaeva 1994   48  0.7525  0.0036  0.0546  0.056  0.5533  0.17
Groot 1988   21  0.818  0.0221  0.0720  0.3011  0.3622  0.33
Hatto 1993   27  0.8021  0.0027  0.0719  0.3024  0.1928  0.24
Hatto 1997   31  0.8050  0.0030  0.0823  0.2824  0.1831  0.22
Horszowski 1983   56  0.6857  0.0055  0.0463  0.0442  0.0658  0.05
Indjic 2001   26  0.8023  0.0031  0.1422  0.2823  0.1930  0.23
Katin 1996   9  0.8452  0.0020  0.0825  0.2519  0.5119  0.36
Kiepura 1999   59  0.6556  0.0058  0.0457  0.0424  0.2148  0.09
Korecka 1992   53  0.6947  0.0059  0.0635  0.0638  0.0654  0.06
Kushner 1990   60  0.6462  0.0056  0.0553  0.0559  0.0463  0.04
Lilamand 2001   61  0.6440  0.0061  0.0554  0.0544  0.0756  0.06
Luisada 1990   50  0.7348  0.0049  0.0545  0.0558  0.0465  0.04
Luisada 2008   46  0.7628  0.0022  0.0828  0.2117  0.4523  0.31
Lushtak 2004   23  0.8137  0.0010  0.1111  0.4115  0.4914  0.45
Malcuzynski 1951   37  0.7830  0.0018  0.1417  0.318  0.4718  0.38
Malcuzynski 1961   24  0.8013  0.0112  0.1213  0.3714  0.3917  0.38
Magaloff 1977   29  0.8017  0.0144  0.0552  0.0524  0.2546  0.11
Magin 1975   40  0.7838  0.0034  0.0547  0.0522  0.3240  0.13
Meguri 1997   55  0.6839  0.0038  0.0459  0.0453  0.0564  0.04
Milkina 1970   20  0.8133  0.0028  0.0729  0.2024  0.3326  0.26
Mohovich 1999   18  0.8164  0.0019  0.1221  0.2919  0.3921  0.34
Nezu 2005   35  0.7854  0.0029  0.0630  0.1928  0.2032  0.19
Ohlsson 1999   13  0.836  0.0324  0.0824  0.2721  0.3424  0.30
Olejniczak 1990   42  0.7746  0.0043  0.0548  0.0525  0.1751  0.09
Osinska 1989   8  0.8458  0.009  0.117  0.5220  0.3913  0.45
Perlemuter 1992   51  0.7224  0.0057  0.0461  0.0433  0.0760  0.05
Poblocka 1999   5  0.864  0.044  0.195  0.5510  0.515  0.53
Rangell 2001   33  0.7922  0.0045  0.0639  0.0619  0.4134  0.16
Richter 1960   17  0.8118  0.0111  0.1010  0.454  0.653  0.54
Richter 1961   25  0.8029  0.0015  0.0815  0.374  0.659  0.49
Rosen 1989   10  0.8411  0.0113  0.1312  0.392  0.648  0.50
Rubinstein 1939   7  0.8510  0.028  0.129  0.4912  0.537  0.51
Rubinstein 1952   19  0.8126  0.0016  0.0916  0.3518  0.4316  0.39
Rubinstein 1966   4  0.862  0.127  0.196  0.5216  0.4511  0.48
Rudanovskaya 2007   44  0.7655  0.0050  0.0550  0.0520  0.3838  0.14
Shebanova 2002   6  0.8631  0.005  0.154  0.568  0.524  0.54
Smith 1975   38  0.7843  0.0048  0.0640  0.0618  0.3337  0.14
Sztompka 1959   52  0.7220  0.0154  0.0456  0.0448  0.0562  0.04
Tanyel 1992   28  0.8019  0.0133  0.0642  0.0617  0.3339  0.14
Tsujii 2005   1  0.893  0.052  0.302  0.598  0.476  0.53
Uninsky 1959   30  0.8016  0.0146  0.0634  0.0636  0.0655  0.06
Vardi 1988   49  0.7465  0.0051  0.0633  0.0627  0.1945  0.11
Wasowski 1980   39  0.7832  0.0035  0.0549  0.0514  0.4236  0.14
Zimerman 1975   12  0.8345  0.0026  0.0826  0.246  0.5320  0.36
Random 1   66  -0.0959  0.0066  0.0166  0.0126  0.1466  0.04
Random 2   64  0.0366  0.0065  0.0265  0.028  0.4049  0.09
Random 3   65  0.0260  0.0064  0.0264  0.0220  0.2252  0.07

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).