Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   11  0.8416  0.017  0.156  0.6616  0.3913  0.51
Ax 1995   32  0.7712  0.0236  0.0835  0.0828  0.2237  0.13
Bacha 1998   40  0.7546  0.0043  0.0460  0.0431  0.1341  0.07
Barbosa 1983   51  0.7121  0.0116  0.1222  0.454  0.5315  0.49
BenOr 1989   55  0.6939  0.0050  0.0642  0.0645  0.0648  0.06
Biret 1990   18  0.8224  0.0018  0.1120  0.5016  0.3721  0.43
Brailowsky 1960   31  0.7849  0.0039  0.0547  0.0530  0.1839  0.09
Chiu 1999   16  0.8322  0.0113  0.1218  0.5110  0.579  0.54
Clidat 1994   7  0.857  0.035  0.204  0.684  0.703  0.69
Cohen 1997   58  0.6742  0.0059  0.0640  0.0613  0.4631  0.17
Cortot 1951   63  0.4965  0.0063  0.0545  0.0541  0.0558  0.05
Csalog 1996   24  0.8128  0.0037  0.0833  0.0825  0.2834  0.15
Czerny 1989   42  0.7458  0.0046  0.0456  0.0444  0.0560  0.04
Ezaki 2006   28  0.8051  0.0040  0.0546  0.0537  0.0650  0.05
Falvay 1989   23  0.8113  0.0127  0.1724  0.4335  0.0730  0.17
Fiorentino 1962   1  0.884  0.094  0.323  0.695  0.674  0.68
Fliere 1977   9  0.8450  0.0021  0.1019  0.5125  0.2523  0.36
Fou 1978   26  0.8010  0.0211  0.139  0.601  0.666  0.63
Francois 1956   52  0.7127  0.0055  0.0548  0.0531  0.1540  0.09
Goldenweiser 1946   62  0.5260  0.0062  0.0462  0.0460  0.0364  0.03
Gornostaeva 1994   53  0.7034  0.0038  0.0736  0.0720  0.3932  0.17
Groot 1988   10  0.8419  0.0117  0.1114  0.555  0.5012  0.52
Hatto 1993   17  0.8214  0.0112  0.1415  0.5311  0.4616  0.49
Hatto 1997   21  0.8231  0.0015  0.1916  0.5213  0.4417  0.48
Horszowski 1983   57  0.6841  0.0051  0.0549  0.0536  0.0743  0.06
Indjic 2001   19  0.8218  0.0114  0.1517  0.5211  0.4418  0.48
Katin 1996   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Kiepura 1999   54  0.6947  0.0044  0.0451  0.043  0.5833  0.15
Korecka 1992   60  0.6632  0.0060  0.0643  0.0657  0.0452  0.05
Kushner 1990   59  0.6615  0.0132  0.0632  0.1232  0.1238  0.12
Lilamand 2001   61  0.6038  0.0061  0.0639  0.0636  0.0842  0.07
Luisada 1990   45  0.7344  0.0053  0.0550  0.0545  0.0555  0.05
Luisada 2008   46  0.7348  0.0052  0.0452  0.0461  0.0461  0.04
Lushtak 2004   30  0.7830  0.0033  0.0641  0.0636  0.0746  0.06
Malcuzynski 1951   56  0.6836  0.0048  0.0455  0.0446  0.0563  0.04
Malcuzynski 1961   48  0.7243  0.0035  0.0834  0.0852  0.0545  0.06
Magaloff 1977   25  0.8129  0.0023  0.1223  0.4410  0.4919  0.46
Magin 1975   41  0.7545  0.0047  0.0461  0.0445  0.0559  0.04
Meguri 1997   50  0.7153  0.0054  0.0458  0.0442  0.0654  0.05
Milkina 1970   8  0.8423  0.0010  0.128  0.625  0.647  0.63
Mohovich 1999   14  0.8320  0.0120  0.1111  0.607  0.4711  0.53
Nezu 2005   34  0.7740  0.0022  0.0928  0.3248  0.0636  0.14
Ohlsson 1999   5  0.875  0.056  0.1812  0.585  0.568  0.57
Olejniczak 1990   33  0.7725  0.0034  0.0737  0.0740  0.0549  0.06
Osinska 1989   27  0.809  0.0228  0.1627  0.3731  0.1329  0.22
Perlemuter 1992   37  0.7759  0.0042  0.0453  0.046  0.4635  0.14
Poblocka 1999   12  0.8411  0.0219  0.1013  0.5732  0.1426  0.28
Rangell 2001   44  0.7352  0.0057  0.0638  0.0656  0.0457  0.05
Richter 1960   36  0.7726  0.0029  0.1129  0.2713  0.4524  0.35
Richter 1961   35  0.7761  0.0030  0.0830  0.1914  0.4525  0.29
Rosen 1989   39  0.7633  0.0041  0.0459  0.0435  0.0656  0.05
Rubinstein 1939   2  0.881  0.211  0.211  0.733  0.751  0.74
Rubinstein 1952   13  0.833  0.143  0.225  0.665  0.635  0.64
Rubinstein 1966   3  0.882  0.162  0.212  0.733  0.672  0.70
Rudanovskaya 2007   29  0.8037  0.0031  0.0731  0.1412  0.5327  0.27
Shebanova 2002   6  0.8635  0.008  0.1310  0.6015  0.4710  0.53
Smith 1975   38  0.7656  0.0049  0.0457  0.0439  0.0651  0.05
Sztompka 1959   47  0.7362  0.0056  0.0454  0.0435  0.0653  0.05
Tanyel 1992   49  0.7254  0.0058  0.0544  0.0558  0.0462  0.04
Tsujii 2005   4  0.878  0.039  0.137  0.6332  0.1228  0.27
Uninsky 1959   20  0.8217  0.0124  0.1321  0.4718  0.4220  0.44
Vardi 1988   22  0.8155  0.0025  0.1325  0.428  0.5714  0.49
Wasowski 1980   43  0.7457  0.0045  0.0463  0.0434  0.0844  0.06
Zimerman 1975   15  0.836  0.0426  0.1526  0.3912  0.4322  0.41
Random 1   66  -0.1064  0.0065  0.0265  0.0222  0.2147  0.06
Random 2   65  -0.0163  0.0066  0.0166  0.0135  0.0666  0.02
Random 3   64  0.0366  0.0064  0.0264  0.0234  0.0565  0.03

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).