Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   1  0.794  0.052  0.232  0.6650  0.0513  0.18
Ax 1995   38  0.6461  0.0038  0.0460  0.0461  0.0464  0.04
Bacha 1998   27  0.6853  0.0035  0.0834  0.0840  0.0634  0.07
Barbosa 1983   9  0.7320  0.0125  0.0829  0.2337  0.0725  0.13
BenOr 1989   25  0.6829  0.0027  0.1127  0.2439  0.0727  0.13
Biret 1990   26  0.6863  0.0033  0.0833  0.0844  0.0636  0.07
Brailowsky 1960   46  0.6125  0.0051  0.0550  0.0557  0.0457  0.04
Chiu 1999   24  0.6922  0.0115  0.0921  0.3423  0.276  0.30
Clidat 1994   14  0.7343  0.0018  0.1016  0.4338  0.0617  0.16
Cohen 1997   59  0.5519  0.0162  0.0547  0.0543  0.0655  0.05
Cortot 1951   53  0.5934  0.0061  0.0463  0.0442  0.0565  0.04
Csalog 1996   43  0.6255  0.0054  0.0555  0.0559  0.0460  0.04
Czerny 1989   44  0.6224  0.0024  0.0924  0.2638  0.0630  0.12
Ezaki 2006   17  0.7111  0.0211  0.1310  0.5219  0.402  0.46
Falvay 1989   35  0.6528  0.0036  0.0739  0.0751  0.0537  0.06
Fiorentino 1962   3  0.7712  0.013  0.243  0.6426  0.285  0.42
Fliere 1977   6  0.757  0.0213  0.176  0.5546  0.0514  0.17
Fou 1978   8  0.743  0.054  0.217  0.5539  0.0710  0.20
Francois 1956   34  0.6626  0.0042  0.0642  0.0641  0.0742  0.06
Goldenweiser 1946   63  0.3946  0.0063  0.0644  0.0653  0.0543  0.05
Gornostaeva 1994   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Groot 1988   50  0.6023  0.0143  0.0640  0.0648  0.0556  0.05
Hatto 1993   36  0.6514  0.0128  0.0925  0.2640  0.0728  0.13
Hatto 1997   39  0.6417  0.0130  0.1028  0.2343  0.0631  0.12
Horszowski 1983   58  0.5532  0.0032  0.0732  0.1343  0.0633  0.09
Indjic 2001   37  0.6437  0.0031  0.0931  0.1842  0.0732  0.11
Katin 1996   21  0.7015  0.0121  0.1120  0.3936  0.0715  0.17
Kiepura 1999   29  0.6638  0.0044  0.0643  0.0622  0.2429  0.12
Korecka 1992   54  0.5940  0.0059  0.0558  0.0544  0.0547  0.05
Kushner 1990   41  0.6336  0.0048  0.0553  0.0562  0.0359  0.04
Lilamand 2001   61  0.5350  0.0058  0.0459  0.0459  0.0561  0.04
Luisada 1990   51  0.5944  0.0039  0.0556  0.0534  0.0738  0.06
Luisada 2008   33  0.6660  0.0034  0.0738  0.0751  0.0452  0.05
Lushtak 2004   18  0.7116  0.0116  0.0815  0.4435  0.0712  0.18
Malcuzynski 1951   10  0.7313  0.0119  0.1019  0.4039  0.0523  0.14
Malcuzynski 1961   4  0.772  0.078  0.159  0.5231  0.177  0.30
Magaloff 1977   7  0.7442  0.006  0.178  0.5314  0.384  0.45
Magin 1975   28  0.6710  0.0229  0.0830  0.2130  0.1119  0.15
Meguri 1997   45  0.629  0.029  0.1123  0.3036  0.0721  0.14
Milkina 1970   19  0.7030  0.0010  0.1011  0.5034  0.099  0.21
Mohovich 1999   49  0.6045  0.0037  0.0557  0.0546  0.0654  0.05
Nezu 2005   13  0.7339  0.0022  0.1418  0.4155  0.0522  0.14
Ohlsson 1999   31  0.6647  0.0040  0.0552  0.0537  0.0550  0.05
Olejniczak 1990   48  0.6149  0.0049  0.0548  0.0557  0.0466  0.04
Osinska 1989   11  0.7321  0.0120  0.1113  0.4753  0.0518  0.15
Perlemuter 1992   62  0.5241  0.0055  0.0554  0.0545  0.0544  0.05
Poblocka 1999   15  0.7231  0.0017  0.0814  0.4637  0.0811  0.19
Rangell 2001   30  0.6618  0.0145  0.0737  0.0739  0.0641  0.06
Richter 1960   47  0.6151  0.0050  0.0645  0.0647  0.0551  0.05
Richter 1961   55  0.5858  0.0052  0.0551  0.0550  0.0545  0.05
Rosen 1989   56  0.5762  0.0056  0.0461  0.0454  0.0463  0.04
Rubinstein 1939   23  0.6933  0.0012  0.1512  0.4832  0.118  0.23
Rubinstein 1952   5  0.778  0.025  0.154  0.6126  0.353  0.46
Rubinstein 1966   2  0.781  0.511  0.511  0.7013  0.481  0.58
Rudanovskaya 2007   60  0.5359  0.0057  0.0462  0.0442  0.0562  0.04
Shebanova 2002   20  0.705  0.0314  0.1217  0.4361  0.0426  0.13
Smith 1975   52  0.5956  0.0053  0.0546  0.0550  0.0546  0.05
Sztompka 1959   57  0.5652  0.0060  0.0549  0.0561  0.0358  0.04
Tanyel 1992   32  0.6648  0.0047  0.0735  0.0743  0.0539  0.06
Tsujii 2005   12  0.736  0.037  0.175  0.5855  0.0516  0.17
Uninsky 1959   40  0.6457  0.0046  0.0736  0.0763  0.0348  0.05
Vardi 1988   42  0.6354  0.0041  0.0641  0.0646  0.0549  0.05
Wasowski 1980   16  0.7235  0.0026  0.0926  0.2536  0.0724  0.13
Zimerman 1975   22  0.6927  0.0023  0.1122  0.3337  0.0720  0.15
Random 1   66  -0.0666  0.0066  0.0166  0.0114  0.3140  0.06
Random 2   65  0.0065  0.0065  0.0265  0.0230  0.1453  0.05
Random 3   64  0.0064  0.0064  0.0264  0.0221  0.2235  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).