Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   63  0.3933  0.0046  0.0637  0.0633  0.1255  0.08
Ax 1995   17  0.592  0.105  0.1718  0.5212  0.5215  0.52
Bacha 1998   61  0.4348  0.0060  0.0556  0.0560  0.0465  0.04
Barbosa 1983   43  0.537  0.0124  0.1322  0.397  0.6317  0.50
BenOr 1989   15  0.6045  0.0017  0.2016  0.5322  0.5116  0.52
Biret 1990   9  0.6217  0.0012  0.116  0.648  0.673  0.65
Brailowsky 1960   47  0.5252  0.0038  0.0463  0.0428  0.2548  0.10
Chiu 1999   49  0.5154  0.0050  0.0644  0.0616  0.5028  0.17
Clidat 1994   50  0.5138  0.0049  0.0736  0.0730  0.1449  0.10
Cohen 1997   64  0.3560  0.0064  0.0550  0.0532  0.1950  0.10
Cortot 1951   60  0.4329  0.0063  0.0464  0.0447  0.0566  0.04
Csalog 1996   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Czerny 1989   7  0.635  0.013  0.274  0.695  0.672  0.68
Ezaki 2006   10  0.6131  0.0010  0.2310  0.596  0.635  0.61
Falvay 1989   2  0.703  0.012  0.612  0.858  0.671  0.75
Fiorentino 1962   16  0.5925  0.0021  0.1321  0.4431  0.2024  0.30
Fliere 1977   36  0.5535  0.0042  0.0558  0.0530  0.2344  0.11
Fou 1978   29  0.5655  0.0041  0.0559  0.0537  0.0860  0.06
Francois 1956   53  0.5034  0.0047  0.0555  0.0521  0.3339  0.13
Goldenweiser 1946   32  0.5513  0.0039  0.0561  0.059  0.5432  0.16
Gornostaeva 1994   45  0.5232  0.0044  0.0553  0.054  0.7127  0.19
Groot 1988   4  0.6411  0.017  0.255  0.6913  0.546  0.61
Hatto 1993   24  0.5866  0.0030  0.0629  0.2144  0.0646  0.11
Hatto 1997   18  0.5958  0.0025  0.0925  0.3244  0.0733  0.15
Horszowski 1983   62  0.438  0.0155  0.0562  0.0516  0.4234  0.14
Indjic 2001   21  0.5850  0.0031  0.0928  0.2148  0.0645  0.11
Katin 1996   5  0.6312  0.006  0.189  0.6220  0.4314  0.52
Kiepura 1999   46  0.5240  0.0052  0.0547  0.0535  0.1056  0.07
Korecka 1992   42  0.5359  0.0053  0.0554  0.0533  0.1652  0.09
Kushner 1990   48  0.5246  0.0036  0.0551  0.0538  0.0861  0.06
Lilamand 2001   52  0.5026  0.0048  0.0560  0.056  0.5930  0.17
Luisada 1990   38  0.5457  0.0033  0.0633  0.1234  0.1240  0.12
Luisada 2008   57  0.4736  0.0054  0.0552  0.0537  0.1158  0.07
Lushtak 2004   35  0.5530  0.0034  0.0548  0.0546  0.0663  0.05
Malcuzynski 1951   31  0.5661  0.0035  0.0646  0.0630  0.2643  0.12
Malcuzynski 1961   12  0.6144  0.0014  0.1414  0.5523  0.4218  0.48
Magaloff 1977   54  0.5047  0.0056  0.0640  0.0623  0.3136  0.14
Magin 1975   40  0.5322  0.0045  0.0641  0.0646  0.0857  0.07
Meguri 1997   55  0.4916  0.0059  0.0735  0.0749  0.0562  0.06
Milkina 1970   14  0.6124  0.0011  0.1013  0.5622  0.3720  0.46
Mohovich 1999   22  0.5841  0.0018  0.1617  0.5216  0.4319  0.47
Nezu 2005   19  0.5942  0.0023  0.1124  0.3340  0.0931  0.17
Ohlsson 1999   25  0.5721  0.0022  0.1423  0.3825  0.3623  0.37
Olejniczak 1990   30  0.5651  0.0032  0.0632  0.1334  0.0947  0.11
Osinska 1989   6  0.6339  0.009  0.1311  0.5828  0.3021  0.42
Perlemuter 1992   58  0.4463  0.0062  0.0639  0.0620  0.2937  0.13
Poblocka 1999   20  0.5865  0.0026  0.1027  0.2933  0.1826  0.23
Rangell 2001   51  0.5153  0.0057  0.0642  0.0629  0.2442  0.12
Richter 1960   44  0.5237  0.0040  0.0549  0.0522  0.3835  0.14
Richter 1961   59  0.4449  0.0061  0.0645  0.0639  0.0759  0.06
Rosen 1989   28  0.5643  0.0037  0.0557  0.0547  0.0664  0.05
Rubinstein 1939   41  0.5328  0.0043  0.0643  0.0632  0.1351  0.09
Rubinstein 1952   23  0.584  0.0116  0.1715  0.5315  0.5313  0.53
Rubinstein 1966   11  0.6127  0.008  0.127  0.6317  0.557  0.59
Rudanovskaya 2007   33  0.5515  0.0028  0.0830  0.1710  0.4925  0.29
Shebanova 2002   27  0.5719  0.0019  0.1620  0.477  0.6110  0.54
Smith 1975   13  0.619  0.0113  0.1212  0.578  0.714  0.64
Sztompka 1959   39  0.5418  0.0051  0.0638  0.0617  0.4729  0.17
Tanyel 1992   34  0.5514  0.0027  0.1126  0.3224  0.4922  0.40
Tsujii 2005   3  0.6623  0.004  0.203  0.7623  0.3911  0.54
Uninsky 1959   8  0.636  0.0115  0.188  0.6216  0.4612  0.53
Vardi 1988   26  0.5720  0.0020  0.1719  0.5014  0.609  0.55
Wasowski 1980   56  0.4962  0.0058  0.0734  0.0739  0.1054  0.08
Zimerman 1975   37  0.5510  0.0129  0.0531  0.1536  0.1138  0.13
Average   1  0.761  0.771  0.761  0.9231  0.358  0.57
Random 1   67  0.0064  0.0067  0.0167  0.0157  0.0367  0.02
Random 2   65  0.0367  0.0066  0.0266  0.0214  0.4053  0.09
Random 3   66  0.0356  0.0065  0.0365  0.036  0.4941  0.12

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).