Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   52  0.486  0.0115  0.1516  0.508  0.6413  0.57
Ax 1995   22  0.5724  0.0014  0.1421  0.4518  0.4221  0.43
Bacha 1998   49  0.4935  0.0050  0.0752  0.0724  0.3339  0.15
Barbosa 1983   53  0.4851  0.0035  0.0744  0.0730  0.2141  0.12
BenOr 1989   41  0.5260  0.0040  0.0749  0.0737  0.0852  0.07
Biret 1990   42  0.5238  0.0036  0.0748  0.0740  0.0753  0.07
Brailowsky 1960   25  0.5615  0.0018  0.1420  0.4614  0.5816  0.52
Chiu 1999   27  0.5629  0.0023  0.0922  0.432  0.7414  0.56
Clidat 1994   26  0.567  0.016  0.1711  0.592  0.669  0.62
Cohen 1997   63  0.3528  0.0063  0.0557  0.0527  0.2442  0.11
Cortot 1951   59  0.4264  0.0062  0.0460  0.0445  0.0566  0.04
Csalog 1996   18  0.5718  0.0027  0.0825  0.3623  0.3822  0.37
Czerny 1989   47  0.5119  0.0037  0.0653  0.0641  0.0754  0.06
Ezaki 2006   12  0.604  0.019  0.2210  0.635  0.656  0.64
Falvay 1989   9  0.6422  0.008  0.166  0.7127  0.2919  0.45
Fiorentino 1962   31  0.5543  0.0042  0.0839  0.0844  0.0847  0.08
Fliere 1977   51  0.4836  0.0051  0.0938  0.0940  0.0745  0.08
Fou 1978   37  0.5362  0.0038  0.0743  0.0740  0.0848  0.07
Francois 1956   20  0.5717  0.0020  0.1117  0.483  0.7111  0.58
Goldenweiser 1946   57  0.4747  0.0053  0.0559  0.0539  0.0657  0.05
Gornostaeva 1994   64  0.3161  0.0064  0.0555  0.0562  0.0465  0.04
Groot 1988   45  0.5110  0.0149  0.0747  0.0760  0.0462  0.05
Hatto 1993   14  0.5959  0.0021  0.1119  0.4728  0.2424  0.34
Hatto 1997   10  0.6132  0.0013  0.2112  0.5723  0.4018  0.48
Horszowski 1983   62  0.3621  0.0060  0.0558  0.0541  0.0656  0.05
Indjic 2001   13  0.5933  0.0019  0.1318  0.4831  0.1826  0.29
Katin 1996   7  0.6416  0.007  0.225  0.7110  0.558  0.62
Kiepura 1999   35  0.5454  0.0044  0.0742  0.0729  0.2840  0.14
Korecka 1992   56  0.4739  0.0057  0.0745  0.0743  0.0849  0.07
Kushner 1990   28  0.5642  0.0017  0.1415  0.519  0.5815  0.54
Lilamand 2001   54  0.4714  0.0052  0.0937  0.099  0.5231  0.22
Luisada 1990   30  0.5565  0.0032  0.1032  0.2538  0.1038  0.16
Luisada 2008   39  0.5356  0.0043  0.0654  0.0627  0.4137  0.16
Lushtak 2004   19  0.5746  0.0022  0.1024  0.4038  0.0835  0.18
Malcuzynski 1951   21  0.5744  0.0031  0.1230  0.3223  0.3923  0.35
Malcuzynski 1961   15  0.5858  0.0024  0.1323  0.4137  0.0833  0.18
Magaloff 1977   58  0.4352  0.0058  0.0751  0.0758  0.0460  0.05
Magin 1975   6  0.645  0.014  0.194  0.753  0.741  0.74
Meguri 1997   48  0.4920  0.0056  0.0556  0.0545  0.0559  0.05
Milkina 1970   4  0.6412  0.012  0.183  0.757  0.653  0.70
Mohovich 1999   32  0.5525  0.0029  0.0931  0.2926  0.2029  0.24
Nezu 2005   3  0.653  0.0310  0.188  0.688  0.675  0.67
Ohlsson 1999   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Olejniczak 1990   44  0.5166  0.0048  0.0841  0.0855  0.0555  0.06
Osinska 1989   17  0.5840  0.0028  0.0826  0.3544  0.0836  0.17
Perlemuter 1992   60  0.4030  0.0061  0.0364  0.0340  0.0663  0.04
Poblocka 1999   11  0.6111  0.0112  0.1913  0.5617  0.4917  0.52
Rangell 2001   38  0.5337  0.0047  0.1135  0.1120  0.5130  0.24
Richter 1960   55  0.4734  0.0055  0.0461  0.0453  0.0564  0.04
Richter 1961   61  0.3849  0.0059  0.0463  0.0437  0.0758  0.05
Rosen 1989   24  0.5627  0.0033  0.1133  0.2129  0.2828  0.24
Rubinstein 1939   16  0.5813  0.0016  0.1314  0.5513  0.6012  0.57
Rubinstein 1952   29  0.5550  0.0026  0.0828  0.3326  0.3425  0.33
Rubinstein 1966   23  0.5641  0.0030  0.1129  0.3236  0.1034  0.18
Rudanovskaya 2007   50  0.4963  0.0054  0.0462  0.0439  0.0761  0.05
Shebanova 2002   34  0.5426  0.0025  0.0727  0.349  0.5520  0.43
Smith 1975   8  0.648  0.0111  0.267  0.696  0.752  0.72
Sztompka 1959   40  0.5223  0.0046  0.0936  0.0916  0.4832  0.21
Tanyel 1992   43  0.5145  0.0045  0.0750  0.0735  0.0946  0.08
Tsujii 2005   2  0.669  0.015  0.312  0.7813  0.584  0.67
Uninsky 1959   5  0.642  0.053  0.259  0.677  0.607  0.63
Vardi 1988   46  0.5157  0.0039  0.0840  0.0845  0.0750  0.07
Wasowski 1980   33  0.5453  0.0034  0.1134  0.117  0.6927  0.28
Zimerman 1975   36  0.5348  0.0041  0.0746  0.0745  0.0751  0.07
Average   1  0.751  0.791  0.781  0.9126  0.3910  0.60
Random 1   67  -0.0131  0.0067  0.0167  0.0163  0.0267  0.01
Random 2   66  0.0167  0.0066  0.0265  0.029  0.4444  0.09
Random 3   65  0.0355  0.0065  0.0266  0.027  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).