Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   63  -0.0527  0.0166  0.0166  0.0166  0.0166  0.01
Ax 1995   9  0.0313  0.0215  0.0814  0.3064  0.0219  0.08
Bacha 1998   14  0.0125  0.0125  0.0619  0.2064  0.0316  0.08
Barbosa 1983   3  0.0435  0.0013  0.0812  0.3664  0.0313  0.10
BenOr 1989   10  0.0315  0.026  0.104  0.4964  0.035  0.12
Biret 1990   15  0.0114  0.0221  0.0629  0.1365  0.0231  0.05
Brailowsky 1960   44  -0.0144  0.0046  0.0539  0.0564  0.0333  0.04
Chiu 1999   37  0.0042  0.0034  0.0540  0.0565  0.0237  0.03
Clidat 1994   27  0.0022  0.0117  0.0723  0.1865  0.0225  0.06
Cohen 1997   45  -0.0116  0.0224  0.0624  0.1565  0.0230  0.05
Cortot 1951   55  -0.0230  0.0151  0.0733  0.0766  0.0148  0.03
Csalog 1996   11  0.0311  0.028  0.106  0.4764  0.033  0.12
Czerny 1989   42  -0.0156  0.0048  0.0538  0.0566  0.0154  0.02
Ezaki 2006   58  -0.0366  0.0054  0.0356  0.0365  0.0250  0.02
Falvay 1989   35  0.0054  0.0039  0.0537  0.0564  0.0334  0.04
Fiorentino 1962   30  0.0050  0.0042  0.0450  0.0464  0.0246  0.03
Fliere 1977   60  -0.0458  0.0062  0.0358  0.0366  0.0151  0.02
Fou 1978   29  0.0047  0.0038  0.0447  0.0466  0.0153  0.02
Francois 1956   40  -0.0140  0.0028  0.0622  0.1964  0.0227  0.06
Goldenweiser 1946   32  0.0039  0.0022  0.0627  0.1464  0.0322  0.06
Gornostaeva 1994   19  0.0034  0.0140  0.0446  0.0465  0.0247  0.03
Groot 1988   13  0.028  0.0411  0.1411  0.3764  0.0310  0.11
Hatto 1993   51  -0.0262  0.0055  0.0361  0.0366  0.0162  0.02
Hatto 1997   56  -0.0252  0.0052  0.0451  0.0466  0.0156  0.02
Horszowski 1983   26  0.006  0.0512  0.1213  0.3564  0.0214  0.08
Indjic 2001   52  -0.0253  0.0053  0.0355  0.0365  0.0260  0.02
Katin 1996   12  0.022  0.072  0.102  0.5364  0.032  0.13
Kiepura 1999   66  -0.0664  0.0064  0.0264  0.0266  0.0164  0.01
Korecka 1992   33  0.0036  0.0041  0.0448  0.0465  0.0238  0.03
Kushner 1990   6  0.0310  0.0310  0.145  0.4864  0.0212  0.10
Lilamand 2001   21  0.0017  0.0216  0.0816  0.2565  0.0221  0.07
Luisada 1990   28  0.0063  0.0030  0.0628  0.1364  0.0229  0.05
Luisada 2008   5  0.0420  0.0118  0.0718  0.2364  0.0317  0.08
Lushtak 2004   54  -0.0259  0.0049  0.0535  0.0566  0.0159  0.02
Malcuzynski 1951   31  0.0024  0.0132  0.0532  0.1064  0.0332  0.05
Malcuzynski 1961   20  0.0018  0.027  0.1110  0.3864  0.038  0.11
Magaloff 1977   24  0.0048  0.0044  0.0445  0.0466  0.0157  0.02
Magin 1975   49  -0.0228  0.0129  0.0725  0.1565  0.0228  0.05
Meguri 1997   22  0.0012  0.0231  0.0630  0.1264  0.0324  0.06
Milkina 1970   36  0.0038  0.0027  0.0620  0.1965  0.0223  0.06
Mohovich 1999   47  -0.0161  0.0045  0.0443  0.0465  0.0245  0.03
Nezu 2005   34  0.0055  0.0020  0.0717  0.2464  0.0318  0.08
Ohlsson 1999   8  0.033  0.079  0.127  0.4665  0.0211  0.10
Olejniczak 1990   53  -0.0249  0.0058  0.0354  0.0366  0.0163  0.02
Osinska 1989   2  0.045  0.063  0.113  0.4960  0.041  0.14
Perlemuter 1992   57  -0.0326  0.0156  0.0360  0.0366  0.0152  0.02
Poblocka 1999   16  0.0121  0.0114  0.0815  0.3064  0.0215  0.08
Rangell 2001   61  -0.0446  0.0059  0.0359  0.0366  0.0161  0.02
Richter 1960   62  -0.0529  0.0160  0.0362  0.0366  0.0155  0.02
Richter 1961   65  -0.0657  0.0065  0.0265  0.0266  0.0165  0.01
Rosen 1989   59  -0.0365  0.0057  0.0452  0.0464  0.0244  0.03
Rubinstein 1939   4  0.044  0.074  0.098  0.4464  0.036  0.11
Rubinstein 1952   25  0.0043  0.0037  0.0453  0.0465  0.0249  0.03
Rubinstein 1966   46  -0.0151  0.0036  0.0444  0.0464  0.0240  0.03
Rudanovskaya 2007   64  -0.0623  0.0163  0.0363  0.0366  0.0158  0.02
Shebanova 2002   48  -0.0241  0.0035  0.0542  0.0565  0.0241  0.03
Smith 1975   17  0.0119  0.0119  0.0626  0.1564  0.0320  0.07
Sztompka 1959   39  -0.0132  0.0150  0.0536  0.0565  0.0239  0.03
Tanyel 1992   41  -0.0137  0.0033  0.0634  0.0664  0.0242  0.03
Tsujii 2005   38  0.0060  0.0047  0.0541  0.0565  0.0243  0.03
Uninsky 1959   7  0.031  0.191  0.191  0.5864  0.027  0.11
Vardi 1988   1  0.047  0.045  0.109  0.4264  0.039  0.11
Wasowski 1980   23  0.0045  0.0043  0.0449  0.0464  0.0336  0.03
Zimerman 1975   18  0.0131  0.0126  0.0521  0.1964  0.0226  0.06
Random 1   50  -0.029  0.0423  0.0631  0.1025  0.144  0.12
Random 2   43  -0.0133  0.0161  0.0357  0.0339  0.0535  0.04
Random 3   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target

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).