Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   63  0.3449  0.0045  0.0743  0.0744  0.0658  0.06
Ax 1995   39  0.5016  0.0113  0.1322  0.3430  0.2118  0.27
Bacha 1998   37  0.5114  0.0135  0.0841  0.0813  0.5525  0.21
Barbosa 1983   55  0.4347  0.0044  0.0652  0.0638  0.0849  0.07
BenOr 1989   10  0.588  0.0215  0.1514  0.4626  0.3711  0.41
Biret 1990   25  0.5331  0.0027  0.0919  0.3730  0.1919  0.27
Brailowsky 1960   9  0.585  0.036  0.186  0.6310  0.622  0.62
Chiu 1999   49  0.4553  0.0046  0.1033  0.1021  0.4324  0.21
Clidat 1994   41  0.4924  0.0032  0.0832  0.1512  0.4021  0.24
Cohen 1997   61  0.3851  0.0061  0.0362  0.0312  0.5240  0.12
Cortot 1951   52  0.4450  0.0063  0.0654  0.0659  0.0463  0.05
Csalog 1996   32  0.5252  0.0033  0.0837  0.0850  0.0557  0.06
Czerny 1989   35  0.5137  0.0030  0.1028  0.2734  0.1031  0.16
Ezaki 2006   26  0.5322  0.0042  0.0648  0.0642  0.0654  0.06
Falvay 1989   3  0.622  0.082  0.213  0.6945  0.0723  0.22
Fiorentino 1962   42  0.4944  0.0043  0.0747  0.0744  0.0851  0.07
Fliere 1977   38  0.5056  0.0036  0.0840  0.0835  0.0846  0.08
Fou 1978   17  0.5532  0.0025  0.0823  0.3343  0.0732  0.15
Francois 1956   46  0.4633  0.0037  0.0836  0.0816  0.3729  0.17
Goldenweiser 1946   53  0.4459  0.0058  0.0459  0.0451  0.0564  0.04
Gornostaeva 1994   56  0.4221  0.0055  0.0557  0.0535  0.0952  0.07
Groot 1988   27  0.5348  0.0029  0.0829  0.2635  0.0836  0.14
Hatto 1993   22  0.5464  0.0031  0.0831  0.1738  0.0742  0.11
Hatto 1997   20  0.5445  0.0028  0.0826  0.2949  0.0637  0.13
Horszowski 1983   58  0.4257  0.0052  0.0650  0.0629  0.2339  0.12
Indjic 2001   16  0.5639  0.0024  0.0827  0.2941  0.0735  0.14
Katin 1996   4  0.607  0.024  0.194  0.6821  0.407  0.52
Kiepura 1999   59  0.4154  0.0056  0.0461  0.0449  0.0659  0.05
Korecka 1992   54  0.4365  0.0057  0.0460  0.0446  0.0856  0.06
Kushner 1990   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Lilamand 2001   62  0.3760  0.0060  0.0363  0.0355  0.0465  0.03
Luisada 1990   18  0.5519  0.0119  0.1117  0.3929  0.2115  0.29
Luisada 2008   40  0.5027  0.0021  0.0930  0.2518  0.5714  0.38
Lushtak 2004   30  0.5213  0.0123  0.0920  0.3646  0.0633  0.15
Malcuzynski 1951   31  0.5236  0.0034  0.0839  0.0857  0.0653  0.07
Malcuzynski 1961   11  0.5711  0.0111  0.1810  0.5633  0.1020  0.24
Magaloff 1977   45  0.4634  0.0051  0.0745  0.0732  0.1641  0.11
Magin 1975   15  0.5617  0.0116  0.1421  0.3539  0.0828  0.17
Meguri 1997   48  0.4563  0.0054  0.0556  0.0541  0.0660  0.05
Milkina 1970   1  0.621  0.541  0.532  0.719  0.611  0.66
Mohovich 1999   28  0.536  0.0317  0.1116  0.4226  0.2016  0.29
Nezu 2005   19  0.554  0.0422  0.1025  0.2948  0.0734  0.14
Ohlsson 1999   14  0.5618  0.017  0.128  0.5814  0.516  0.54
Olejniczak 1990   21  0.5429  0.0020  0.0924  0.3329  0.2317  0.28
Osinska 1989   2  0.623  0.083  0.251  0.7119  0.434  0.55
Perlemuter 1992   57  0.4261  0.0062  0.0558  0.0532  0.1048  0.07
Poblocka 1999   8  0.5812  0.0114  0.1513  0.4725  0.3412  0.40
Rangell 2001   44  0.4740  0.0049  0.0746  0.0727  0.2538  0.13
Richter 1960   47  0.4643  0.0053  0.0651  0.0657  0.0561  0.05
Richter 1961   60  0.3955  0.0059  0.0653  0.0639  0.0655  0.06
Rosen 1989   43  0.4835  0.0047  0.0935  0.0942  0.0650  0.07
Rubinstein 1939   7  0.589  0.0212  0.2012  0.5517  0.535  0.54
Rubinstein 1952   12  0.5728  0.005  0.145  0.6412  0.583  0.61
Rubinstein 1966   13  0.5620  0.0010  0.207  0.6023  0.458  0.52
Rudanovskaya 2007   34  0.5230  0.0041  0.0744  0.078  0.4926  0.19
Shebanova 2002   29  0.5241  0.0026  0.0918  0.3914  0.5110  0.45
Smith 1975   36  0.5123  0.0038  0.1034  0.1033  0.0944  0.09
Sztompka 1959   24  0.5425  0.0039  0.0742  0.0719  0.4427  0.18
Tanyel 1992   50  0.4438  0.0050  0.0555  0.0547  0.0662  0.05
Tsujii 2005   6  0.6042  0.009  0.159  0.5737  0.0922  0.23
Uninsky 1959   5  0.6026  0.008  0.1611  0.5614  0.469  0.51
Vardi 1988   23  0.5415  0.0118  0.1215  0.4526  0.3213  0.38
Wasowski 1980   33  0.5210  0.0240  0.0649  0.0616  0.4530  0.16
Zimerman 1975   51  0.4446  0.0048  0.0838  0.0838  0.0947  0.08
Random 1   66  0.0058  0.0066  0.0166  0.0133  0.0666  0.02
Random 2   64  0.0466  0.0065  0.0265  0.027  0.4545  0.09
Random 3   65  0.0362  0.0064  0.0264  0.025  0.4843  0.10

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).