Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   26  0.5336  0.0012  0.1312  0.522  0.745  0.62
Ax 1995   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Bacha 1998   53  0.4310  0.0147  0.0752  0.0728  0.2541  0.13
Barbosa 1983   31  0.529  0.0134  0.0938  0.0917  0.4832  0.21
BenOr 1989   43  0.4838  0.0044  0.1433  0.1441  0.0749  0.10
Biret 1990   42  0.4937  0.0039  0.0846  0.0829  0.2143  0.13
Brailowsky 1960   24  0.533  0.087  0.1510  0.536  0.666  0.59
Chiu 1999   46  0.4623  0.0045  0.0845  0.0823  0.4236  0.18
Clidat 1994   45  0.4722  0.0046  0.0940  0.0935  0.0752  0.08
Cohen 1997   63  0.2351  0.0063  0.0563  0.0556  0.0465  0.04
Cortot 1951   56  0.4048  0.0057  0.0562  0.0522  0.3544  0.13
Csalog 1996   6  0.594  0.066  0.1711  0.5217  0.5212  0.52
Czerny 1989   20  0.5431  0.0022  0.0821  0.3826  0.3022  0.34
Ezaki 2006   4  0.602  0.084  0.175  0.6010  0.567  0.58
Falvay 1989   5  0.5914  0.018  0.159  0.5444  0.0735  0.19
Fiorentino 1962   3  0.617  0.033  0.253  0.6712  0.593  0.63
Fliere 1977   40  0.516  0.0319  0.1222  0.3814  0.4815  0.43
Fou 1978   11  0.5729  0.0011  0.117  0.5515  0.5210  0.53
Francois 1956   50  0.4350  0.0050  0.0842  0.0826  0.2045  0.13
Goldenweiser 1946   47  0.4559  0.0049  0.0751  0.0715  0.3340  0.15
Gornostaeva 1994   59  0.3744  0.0058  0.0560  0.0546  0.0662  0.05
Groot 1988   36  0.5117  0.0038  0.0843  0.0841  0.0756  0.07
Hatto 1993   14  0.5542  0.0024  0.1319  0.4128  0.2423  0.31
Hatto 1997   21  0.5449  0.0027  0.0827  0.3133  0.1137  0.18
Horszowski 1983   62  0.2666  0.0062  0.0659  0.0661  0.0363  0.04
Indjic 2001   22  0.5461  0.0023  0.0820  0.3931  0.1827  0.26
Katin 1996   27  0.5358  0.0020  0.0924  0.3532  0.1926  0.26
Kiepura 1999   15  0.5528  0.0016  0.1114  0.4811  0.658  0.56
Korecka 1992   38  0.5146  0.0042  0.1036  0.108  0.6428  0.25
Kushner 1990   41  0.5040  0.0032  0.1130  0.2122  0.3425  0.27
Lilamand 2001   58  0.3954  0.0059  0.0750  0.0732  0.0951  0.08
Luisada 1990   19  0.5452  0.0026  0.1023  0.3623  0.3421  0.35
Luisada 2008   35  0.5133  0.0040  0.0941  0.0923  0.4733  0.21
Lushtak 2004   34  0.5145  0.0041  0.0847  0.0841  0.0755  0.07
Malcuzynski 1951   33  0.5220  0.0036  0.1037  0.1027  0.2839  0.17
Malcuzynski 1961   16  0.5539  0.0030  0.0832  0.2056  0.0547  0.10
Magaloff 1977   52  0.4341  0.0053  0.0655  0.0627  0.2346  0.12
Magin 1975   7  0.5826  0.009  0.166  0.5712  0.549  0.55
Meguri 1997   55  0.4160  0.0054  0.0656  0.0637  0.0854  0.07
Milkina 1970   18  0.5418  0.0013  0.1415  0.4825  0.2920  0.37
Mohovich 1999   44  0.4721  0.0043  0.1234  0.1234  0.0848  0.10
Nezu 2005   17  0.5516  0.0125  0.0828  0.3126  0.2924  0.30
Ohlsson 1999   10  0.5747  0.0017  0.1217  0.4220  0.4516  0.43
Olejniczak 1990   37  0.5135  0.0029  0.0829  0.2127  0.2629  0.23
Osinska 1989   13  0.5515  0.0110  0.138  0.5426  0.3117  0.41
Perlemuter 1992   61  0.3365  0.0061  0.0658  0.0656  0.0459  0.05
Poblocka 1999   9  0.5711  0.0115  0.1116  0.4319  0.4813  0.45
Rangell 2001   49  0.4357  0.0052  0.0654  0.0638  0.0758  0.06
Richter 1960   60  0.3655  0.0060  0.0657  0.0663  0.0364  0.04
Richter 1961   57  0.4012  0.0156  0.0749  0.0740  0.0657  0.06
Rosen 1989   30  0.5253  0.0028  0.0825  0.3115  0.5218  0.40
Rubinstein 1939   8  0.585  0.045  0.194  0.618  0.634  0.62
Rubinstein 1952   23  0.5424  0.0018  0.1218  0.4215  0.4914  0.45
Rubinstein 1966   2  0.618  0.032  0.242  0.689  0.672  0.67
Rudanovskaya 2007   51  0.4330  0.0048  0.0844  0.0816  0.3738  0.17
Shebanova 2002   54  0.4162  0.0055  0.0561  0.0540  0.0660  0.05
Smith 1975   32  0.5225  0.0035  0.1135  0.1123  0.4030  0.21
Sztompka 1959   39  0.5127  0.0037  0.0753  0.077  0.6131  0.21
Tanyel 1992   29  0.5332  0.0021  0.0826  0.3126  0.4719  0.38
Tsujii 2005   1  0.631  0.531  0.521  0.7610  0.641  0.70
Uninsky 1959   25  0.5334  0.0031  0.0931  0.2027  0.2134  0.20
Vardi 1988   28  0.5319  0.0033  0.0939  0.0931  0.2042  0.13
Wasowski 1980   48  0.4456  0.0051  0.0848  0.0841  0.0850  0.08
Zimerman 1975   12  0.5713  0.0114  0.1513  0.5016  0.5711  0.53
Random 1   65  0.0163  0.0065  0.0265  0.0230  0.1261  0.05
Random 2   66  0.0064  0.0066  0.0166  0.0143  0.0566  0.02
Random 3   64  0.0343  0.0064  0.0264  0.0214  0.3053  0.08

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).