Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   63  0.3254  0.0049  0.0646  0.0643  0.0658  0.06
Ax 1995   55  0.4718  0.0137  0.0834  0.0834  0.1243  0.10
Bacha 1998   57  0.4546  0.0057  0.0552  0.0534  0.0951  0.07
Barbosa 1983   54  0.4762  0.0036  0.0736  0.0724  0.3437  0.15
BenOr 1989   6  0.6222  0.0012  0.159  0.5318  0.528  0.52
Biret 1990   9  0.6016  0.0110  0.118  0.5411  0.606  0.57
Brailowsky 1960   34  0.5433  0.0021  0.1022  0.2916  0.5616  0.40
Chiu 1999   41  0.5142  0.0051  0.0835  0.0813  0.5427  0.21
Clidat 1994   47  0.5041  0.0050  0.0548  0.0543  0.0664  0.05
Cohen 1997   62  0.4044  0.0058  0.0460  0.044  0.6038  0.15
Cortot 1951   56  0.4765  0.0063  0.0645  0.0631  0.1844  0.10
Csalog 1996   17  0.5836  0.0017  0.1515  0.4316  0.5210  0.47
Czerny 1989   18  0.5835  0.0014  0.1112  0.5215  0.527  0.52
Ezaki 2006   27  0.5652  0.0026  0.0723  0.2728  0.2822  0.27
Falvay 1989   4  0.626  0.045  0.145  0.5939  0.0826  0.22
Fiorentino 1962   22  0.5728  0.0024  0.0920  0.3040  0.0935  0.16
Fliere 1977   26  0.567  0.047  0.1317  0.3818  0.4613  0.42
Fou 1978   33  0.5430  0.0020  0.0821  0.3028  0.2523  0.27
Francois 1956   37  0.5253  0.0041  0.0833  0.088  0.5129  0.20
Goldenweiser 1946   52  0.4826  0.0045  0.0458  0.0422  0.2245  0.09
Gornostaeva 1994   49  0.4923  0.0031  0.0629  0.145  0.6320  0.30
Groot 1988   14  0.5925  0.0015  0.1511  0.5220  0.4111  0.46
Hatto 1993   16  0.5938  0.0034  0.0737  0.0752  0.0660  0.06
Hatto 1997   20  0.5732  0.0033  0.0643  0.0646  0.0656  0.06
Horszowski 1983   59  0.4347  0.0059  0.0361  0.0331  0.1946  0.08
Indjic 2001   10  0.6021  0.0129  0.0731  0.1356  0.0550  0.08
Katin 1996   3  0.631  0.261  0.252  0.6413  0.524  0.58
Kiepura 1999   23  0.5720  0.0127  0.0828  0.1719  0.5819  0.31
Korecka 1992   30  0.5417  0.0144  0.0551  0.0518  0.4736  0.15
Kushner 1990   36  0.538  0.0322  0.0826  0.2016  0.4221  0.29
Lilamand 2001   60  0.4329  0.0062  0.0459  0.0428  0.1647  0.08
Luisada 1990   31  0.5455  0.0032  0.0730  0.1336  0.1139  0.12
Luisada 2008   51  0.4831  0.0053  0.0647  0.0637  0.1048  0.08
Lushtak 2004   2  0.633  0.143  0.193  0.6410  0.505  0.57
Malcuzynski 1951   40  0.5124  0.0048  0.0553  0.0544  0.0761  0.06
Malcuzynski 1961   19  0.574  0.0511  0.147  0.5526  0.3015  0.41
Magaloff 1977   61  0.4260  0.0061  0.0362  0.0337  0.0763  0.05
Magin 1975   11  0.605  0.046  0.124  0.618  0.612  0.61
Meguri 1997   39  0.5150  0.0054  0.0555  0.0526  0.1942  0.10
Milkina 1970   1  0.642  0.152  0.231  0.6913  0.551  0.62
Mohovich 1999   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Nezu 2005   24  0.5748  0.0046  0.0556  0.0543  0.0857  0.06
Ohlsson 1999   28  0.5558  0.0028  0.0825  0.2030  0.2924  0.24
Olejniczak 1990   7  0.6134  0.0019  0.0916  0.3919  0.4614  0.42
Osinska 1989   12  0.5951  0.0016  0.1318  0.3736  0.0932  0.18
Perlemuter 1992   38  0.5227  0.0043  0.0554  0.051  0.6731  0.18
Poblocka 1999   25  0.5737  0.0042  0.0549  0.0546  0.0853  0.06
Rangell 2001   48  0.5059  0.0056  0.0738  0.0731  0.1841  0.11
Richter 1960   42  0.5143  0.0055  0.0641  0.0629  0.2040  0.11
Richter 1961   29  0.5419  0.0125  0.0724  0.213  0.7117  0.39
Rosen 1989   5  0.6215  0.029  0.156  0.576  0.663  0.61
Rubinstein 1939   50  0.4840  0.0039  0.0644  0.0643  0.0755  0.06
Rubinstein 1952   46  0.5056  0.0040  0.0640  0.0640  0.0852  0.07
Rubinstein 1966   15  0.5910  0.034  0.1210  0.5320  0.499  0.51
Rudanovskaya 2007   21  0.5711  0.0230  0.0632  0.1210  0.4825  0.24
Shebanova 2002   32  0.5439  0.0035  0.0642  0.0615  0.5133  0.17
Smith 1975   53  0.4861  0.0052  0.0557  0.0538  0.0854  0.06
Sztompka 1959   44  0.5145  0.0047  0.0550  0.0511  0.5334  0.16
Tanyel 1992   35  0.5313  0.0218  0.1019  0.3028  0.4118  0.35
Tsujii 2005   8  0.619  0.038  0.1314  0.4538  0.0830  0.19
Uninsky 1959   13  0.5912  0.0213  0.1113  0.4621  0.4012  0.43
Vardi 1988   43  0.5114  0.0223  0.0927  0.1830  0.2328  0.20
Wasowski 1980   58  0.4463  0.0060  0.0363  0.0342  0.0862  0.05
Zimerman 1975   45  0.5049  0.0038  0.0639  0.0641  0.0759  0.06
Random 1   65  0.0157  0.0064  0.0264  0.0213  0.3049  0.08
Random 2   64  0.0264  0.0066  0.0166  0.0133  0.0765  0.03
Random 3   66  -0.0166  0.0065  0.0265  0.0243  0.0466  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).