Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   12  0.768  0.009  0.156  0.6142  0.0616  0.19
Ax 1995   16  0.7420  0.0013  0.1113  0.4617  0.338  0.39
Bacha 1998   19  0.7351  0.007  0.1612  0.4614  0.447  0.45
Barbosa 1983   58  0.5242  0.0052  0.0458  0.0462  0.0460  0.04
BenOr 1989   59  0.4657  0.0061  0.0638  0.0651  0.0552  0.05
Biret 1990   22  0.722  0.0121  0.0824  0.2454  0.0527  0.11
Brailowsky 1960   17  0.7423  0.0020  0.1321  0.3224  0.2911  0.30
Chiu 1999   42  0.6433  0.0054  0.0639  0.0660  0.0545  0.05
Clidat 1994   4  0.7826  0.006  0.173  0.6514  0.502  0.57
Cohen 1997   50  0.5935  0.0050  0.0554  0.0523  0.2723  0.12
Cortot 1951   61  0.4447  0.0060  0.0556  0.0563  0.0363  0.04
Csalog 1996   40  0.655  0.0044  0.0547  0.0547  0.0549  0.05
Czerny 1989   25  0.7144  0.0032  0.0532  0.0940  0.0637  0.07
Ezaki 2006   26  0.7139  0.0037  0.0834  0.0839  0.0636  0.07
Falvay 1989   7  0.7738  0.004  0.1710  0.5026  0.259  0.35
Fiorentino 1962   9  0.7727  0.0011  0.1416  0.4531  0.1314  0.24
Fliere 1977   2  0.804  0.012  0.214  0.6515  0.375  0.49
Fou 1978   41  0.6554  0.0036  0.0644  0.0645  0.0642  0.06
Francois 1956   38  0.6653  0.0035  0.0549  0.0530  0.1632  0.09
Goldenweiser 1946   62  0.4019  0.0062  0.0462  0.0454  0.0555  0.04
Gornostaeva 1994   51  0.5855  0.0047  0.0550  0.0551  0.0551  0.05
Groot 1988   27  0.7163  0.0034  0.0555  0.0562  0.0462  0.04
Hatto 1993   18  0.7411  0.0022  0.1317  0.3659  0.0424  0.12
Hatto 1997   21  0.726  0.0024  0.1120  0.3356  0.0519  0.13
Horszowski 1983   52  0.5825  0.0055  0.0642  0.0664  0.0354  0.04
Indjic 2001   20  0.7316  0.0023  0.0819  0.3457  0.0521  0.13
Katin 1996   8  0.7760  0.0015  0.1614  0.4530  0.1912  0.29
Kiepura 1999   57  0.527  0.0048  0.0737  0.0726  0.1922  0.12
Korecka 1992   49  0.5937  0.0051  0.0551  0.0548  0.0458  0.04
Kushner 1990   60  0.4545  0.0049  0.0546  0.0534  0.0548  0.05
Lilamand 2001   63  0.3936  0.0063  0.0553  0.0556  0.0550  0.05
Luisada 1990   31  0.7061  0.0028  0.1026  0.1961  0.0430  0.09
Luisada 2008   35  0.6932  0.0027  0.0925  0.2346  0.0525  0.11
Lushtak 2004   24  0.7222  0.0026  0.1023  0.2551  0.0526  0.11
Malcuzynski 1951   54  0.5765  0.0045  0.0552  0.0563  0.0464  0.04
Malcuzynski 1961   46  0.6315  0.0025  0.0728  0.1446  0.0629  0.09
Magaloff 1977   45  0.6321  0.0053  0.0548  0.0546  0.0743  0.06
Magin 1975   39  0.669  0.0043  0.0735  0.0735  0.0641  0.06
Meguri 1997   56  0.5331  0.0059  0.0459  0.0456  0.0559  0.04
Milkina 1970   32  0.7030  0.0038  0.0736  0.0764  0.0346  0.05
Mohovich 1999   5  0.7813  0.008  0.185  0.6413  0.424  0.52
Nezu 2005   34  0.6946  0.0019  0.1122  0.2846  0.0620  0.13
Ohlsson 1999   28  0.7052  0.0029  0.0629  0.1256  0.0438  0.07
Olejniczak 1990   37  0.6710  0.0030  0.0630  0.1051  0.0540  0.07
Osinska 1989   15  0.7418  0.0010  0.117  0.5528  0.2010  0.33
Perlemuter 1992   55  0.5529  0.0057  0.0363  0.0339  0.0556  0.04
Poblocka 1999   3  0.803  0.013  0.252  0.6923  0.306  0.45
Rangell 2001   30  0.7024  0.0039  0.0931  0.0941  0.0639  0.07
Richter 1960   1  0.931  0.891  0.881  0.911  0.911  0.91
Richter 1961   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Rosen 1989   33  0.6949  0.0042  0.0545  0.0552  0.0461  0.04
Rubinstein 1939   13  0.7641  0.0016  0.1315  0.4548  0.0618  0.16
Rubinstein 1952   44  0.6466  0.0046  0.0643  0.0663  0.0453  0.05
Rubinstein 1966   6  0.7856  0.0012  0.188  0.5431  0.1513  0.28
Rudanovskaya 2007   29  0.7040  0.0033  0.0457  0.0424  0.2428  0.10
Shebanova 2002   23  0.7262  0.0031  0.0533  0.0938  0.0733  0.08
Smith 1975   48  0.6034  0.0056  0.0461  0.0457  0.0457  0.04
Sztompka 1959   53  0.5748  0.0058  0.0460  0.0464  0.0365  0.03
Tanyel 1992   47  0.6214  0.0018  0.0927  0.1847  0.0531  0.09
Tsujii 2005   10  0.7643  0.0014  0.1211  0.4742  0.0717  0.18
Uninsky 1959   36  0.6759  0.0040  0.0640  0.0646  0.0447  0.05
Vardi 1988   11  0.7617  0.005  0.149  0.5310  0.523  0.52
Wasowski 1980   43  0.6428  0.0041  0.0641  0.0654  0.0544  0.05
Zimerman 1975   14  0.7412  0.0017  0.1018  0.3526  0.1615  0.24
Random 1   66  -0.0464  0.0065  0.0265  0.0213  0.3635  0.08
Random 2   64  0.0258  0.0064  0.0264  0.0210  0.3634  0.08
Random 3   65  0.0050  0.0066  0.0166  0.0153  0.0366  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).