Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   4  0.8022  0.005  0.146  0.5131  0.1417  0.27
Ax 1995   34  0.7035  0.0045  0.0552  0.0535  0.0852  0.06
Bacha 1998   37  0.6952  0.0036  0.0544  0.0527  0.2738  0.12
Barbosa 1983   24  0.7149  0.0039  0.0548  0.0534  0.0949  0.07
BenOr 1989   46  0.6825  0.0038  0.0457  0.0438  0.0853  0.06
Biret 1990   25  0.7155  0.0044  0.0636  0.0644  0.0654  0.06
Brailowsky 1960   40  0.6944  0.0034  0.0550  0.0527  0.2737  0.12
Chiu 1999   60  0.5848  0.0052  0.0555  0.0542  0.0655  0.05
Clidat 1994   26  0.7154  0.0048  0.0549  0.0550  0.0658  0.05
Cohen 1997   64  0.4364  0.0064  0.0542  0.0560  0.0466  0.04
Cortot 1951   59  0.5947  0.0061  0.0458  0.049  0.4435  0.13
Csalog 1996   35  0.7062  0.0047  0.0539  0.0539  0.0657  0.05
Czerny 1989   44  0.6851  0.0031  0.0621  0.2021  0.3614  0.27
Ezaki 2006   32  0.7115  0.0126  0.0629  0.1621  0.4019  0.25
Falvay 1989   39  0.6961  0.0037  0.0461  0.0448  0.0563  0.04
Fiorentino 1962   21  0.7338  0.0027  0.0523  0.1841  0.0645  0.10
Fliere 1977   6  0.7832  0.006  0.159  0.4718  0.319  0.38
Fou 1978   27  0.7131  0.0025  0.0731  0.1539  0.0842  0.11
Francois 1956   47  0.6820  0.0049  0.0459  0.0418  0.3741  0.12
Goldenweiser 1946   57  0.6137  0.0056  0.0554  0.0511  0.4132  0.14
Gornostaeva 1994   20  0.7333  0.0035  0.0540  0.0520  0.4034  0.14
Groot 1988   50  0.6619  0.0042  0.0553  0.0541  0.0661  0.05
Hatto 1993   18  0.7326  0.0015  0.1112  0.3928  0.1521  0.24
Hatto 1997   15  0.7416  0.0112  0.1011  0.4423  0.2012  0.30
Horszowski 1983   58  0.6060  0.0051  0.0462  0.0430  0.1348  0.07
Indjic 2001   19  0.738  0.0214  0.0613  0.3626  0.1620  0.24
Katin 1996   42  0.6857  0.0054  0.0547  0.0556  0.0465  0.04
Kiepura 1999   54  0.6543  0.0062  0.0635  0.0638  0.0650  0.06
Korecka 1992   48  0.6846  0.0058  0.0638  0.0626  0.2639  0.12
Kushner 1990   23  0.7242  0.0040  0.0637  0.0628  0.2143  0.11
Lilamand 2001   52  0.6512  0.0146  0.0546  0.0518  0.4233  0.14
Luisada 1990   33  0.7124  0.0030  0.0624  0.1819  0.4016  0.27
Luisada 2008   31  0.7121  0.0024  0.0627  0.1719  0.4315  0.27
Lushtak 2004   14  0.7540  0.009  0.147  0.4915  0.504  0.49
Malcuzynski 1951   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Malcuzynski 1961   1  0.871  0.451  0.442  0.762  0.701  0.73
Magaloff 1977   36  0.703  0.0422  0.0628  0.1721  0.2725  0.21
Magin 1975   9  0.7741  0.0018  0.0720  0.2320  0.3613  0.29
Meguri 1997   62  0.576  0.0320  0.0719  0.2533  0.1327  0.18
Milkina 1970   30  0.7134  0.0028  0.0525  0.1834  0.1231  0.15
Mohovich 1999   43  0.6830  0.0029  0.0526  0.1725  0.2923  0.22
Nezu 2005   17  0.7413  0.0119  0.0716  0.3134  0.0830  0.16
Ohlsson 1999   22  0.724  0.0313  0.0730  0.1531  0.2126  0.18
Olejniczak 1990   38  0.6927  0.0043  0.0551  0.0530  0.1247  0.08
Osinska 1989   2  0.8410  0.013  0.423  0.6514  0.432  0.53
Perlemuter 1992   55  0.6358  0.0057  0.0545  0.0519  0.2936  0.12
Poblocka 1999   10  0.7728  0.0011  0.1210  0.4531  0.1518  0.26
Rangell 2001   29  0.7123  0.0023  0.0618  0.2617  0.4610  0.35
Richter 1960   45  0.6839  0.0033  0.0533  0.1020  0.3128  0.18
Richter 1961   61  0.5763  0.0059  0.0464  0.0453  0.0562  0.04
Rosen 1989   41  0.6929  0.0032  0.0632  0.1225  0.2829  0.18
Rubinstein 1939   13  0.7617  0.0010  0.1114  0.3519  0.3011  0.32
Rubinstein 1952   5  0.799  0.018  0.158  0.4916  0.455  0.47
Rubinstein 1966   16  0.7436  0.0017  0.0717  0.2831  0.1624  0.21
Rudanovskaya 2007   63  0.5450  0.0063  0.0734  0.0762  0.0459  0.05
Shebanova 2002   11  0.765  0.037  0.155  0.5324  0.338  0.42
Smith 1975   56  0.6311  0.0150  0.0460  0.0432  0.0951  0.06
Sztompka 1959   51  0.6653  0.0055  0.0543  0.0522  0.3040  0.12
Tanyel 1992   12  0.7645  0.0021  0.0622  0.1925  0.2722  0.23
Tsujii 2005   7  0.787  0.024  0.314  0.6315  0.336  0.46
Uninsky 1959   28  0.7118  0.0041  0.0556  0.0540  0.0556  0.05
Vardi 1988   53  0.6559  0.0060  0.0541  0.0560  0.0464  0.04
Wasowski 1980   8  0.7814  0.0116  0.0615  0.346  0.547  0.43
Zimerman 1975   49  0.6756  0.0053  0.0463  0.0436  0.0760  0.05
Average   3  0.832  0.242  0.491  0.7825  0.333  0.51
Random 1   67  -0.0666  0.0066  0.0266  0.026  0.5144  0.10
Random 2   65  0.0067  0.0065  0.0265  0.026  0.4346  0.09
Random 3   66  -0.0165  0.0067  0.0167  0.0131  0.1167  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).