Horowitz 1985

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   10  0.606  0.014  0.225  0.5748  0.059  0.17
Ashkenazy 1981   44  0.4934  0.0041  0.0639  0.0662  0.0549  0.05
Beliavsky 2004   36  0.529  0.0124  0.1226  0.3654  0.0519  0.13
BenOr 1989   31  0.5339  0.0029  0.0728  0.2854  0.0621  0.13
Biret 1990   3  0.655  0.023  0.223  0.6955  0.057  0.19
Blet 2003   24  0.5421  0.0015  0.1621  0.3752  0.0427  0.12
Block 1995   58  0.4529  0.0054  0.0458  0.0449  0.0561  0.04
Brailowsky 1960   19  0.5624  0.0036  0.0836  0.0848  0.0736  0.07
Chiu 1999   59  0.4410  0.0147  0.0449  0.0462  0.0362  0.03
Clidat 1994   20  0.5626  0.0022  0.0918  0.3957  0.0518  0.14
Cohen 1997   62  0.3458  0.0062  0.0542  0.0550  0.0550  0.05
Coop 1987   54  0.4655  0.0052  0.0459  0.0459  0.0456  0.04
Cortot 1951   52  0.4644  0.0060  0.0460  0.0445  0.0651  0.05
Czerny 1949   17  0.5720  0.0016  0.159  0.5461  0.0414  0.15
Czerny 1949b   23  0.5537  0.0021  0.0913  0.4861  0.0416  0.14
Ezaki 2006   43  0.5045  0.0045  0.0547  0.0558  0.0543  0.05
Falvay 1989   60  0.4247  0.0061  0.0545  0.0556  0.0545  0.05
Ferenczy 1958   61  0.4236  0.0059  0.0454  0.0452  0.0559  0.04
Fiorentino 1962   29  0.5419  0.0037  0.0934  0.0950  0.0639  0.07
Fliere 1977   21  0.5638  0.0026  0.1024  0.3754  0.0612  0.15
Fou 1978   51  0.4753  0.0055  0.0546  0.0560  0.0546  0.05
Francois 1956   50  0.4761  0.0058  0.0462  0.0440  0.0652  0.05
Hatto 1997   48  0.4860  0.0051  0.0450  0.0461  0.0458  0.04
Horowitz 1971   1  0.751  0.781  0.771  0.911  0.821  0.86
Horowitz 1985   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Indjic 2001   49  0.4862  0.0056  0.0457  0.0462  0.0363  0.03
Kapell 1951   45  0.4942  0.0030  0.0832  0.1862  0.0337  0.07
Kiepura 1999   22  0.5611  0.0138  0.1333  0.1353  0.0534  0.08
Kilenyi 1937   41  0.5025  0.0032  0.1030  0.1956  0.0531  0.10
Kissin 1993   26  0.5435  0.0018  0.1017  0.4260  0.0420  0.13
Kitain 1937   55  0.463  0.0311  0.1216  0.434  0.652  0.53
Kushner 1990   13  0.5865  0.0013  0.1212  0.4963  0.0325  0.12
Levy 1951   33  0.5323  0.0028  0.0929  0.2155  0.0530  0.10
Luisada 1990   14  0.5718  0.0025  0.1023  0.3735  0.0810  0.17
Lushtak 2004   28  0.5440  0.0023  0.1122  0.3763  0.0329  0.11
Lympany 1968   18  0.5731  0.0020  0.0820  0.3758  0.0422  0.12
Magaloff 1977   40  0.5056  0.0050  0.0448  0.0457  0.0560  0.04
Magaloff 1977b   39  0.5057  0.0049  0.0456  0.0462  0.0364  0.03
Magin 1975   47  0.4917  0.0042  0.0452  0.0461  0.0454  0.04
Milkina 1970   11  0.6032  0.007  0.137  0.5659  0.0413  0.15
Mohovich 1999   5  0.627  0.018  0.148  0.5542  0.068  0.18
Nadelmann 1956   2  0.662  0.042  0.412  0.7049  0.056  0.19
Ohlsson 1999   57  0.4514  0.0057  0.0455  0.0450  0.0557  0.04
Olejniczac 1990   25  0.5416  0.0034  0.0738  0.0744  0.0738  0.07
Olejniczak 1991   34  0.5264  0.0040  0.0935  0.0949  0.0735  0.08
Osinska 1989   4  0.6322  0.005  0.264  0.6448  0.075  0.21
Paderewski 1912   32  0.5350  0.0033  0.0641  0.0656  0.0547  0.05
Perahia 1994   6  0.628  0.016  0.156  0.5618  0.453  0.50
Perlemuter 1986   35  0.5243  0.0039  0.0737  0.0756  0.0540  0.06
Poblocka 1999   37  0.5128  0.0043  0.0543  0.0557  0.0544  0.05
Rangell 2001   56  0.4527  0.0053  0.0363  0.0360  0.0465  0.03
Risler 1920   46  0.4951  0.0044  0.0544  0.0561  0.0453  0.04
Rosen 1989   42  0.5030  0.0048  0.0453  0.0444  0.0748  0.05
Rubinstein 1939   7  0.614  0.0210  0.1914  0.4626  0.224  0.32
Rubinstein 1952   12  0.5959  0.0014  0.1715  0.4634  0.0611  0.17
Rubinstein 1966   8  0.6154  0.009  0.1211  0.5157  0.0417  0.14
Rummel 1943   30  0.5363  0.0035  0.0640  0.0639  0.0641  0.06
Shebanova 2002   38  0.5113  0.0031  0.0831  0.1961  0.0532  0.10
Smith 1975   9  0.6012  0.0012  0.1510  0.5261  0.0324  0.12
Szpilman 1948   16  0.5741  0.0027  0.1119  0.3858  0.0515  0.14
Uninsky 1971   27  0.5415  0.0017  0.1025  0.3758  0.0426  0.12
Wasowski 1980   15  0.5733  0.0019  0.1127  0.3457  0.0423  0.12
Weissenberg 1971   53  0.4648  0.0046  0.0451  0.0454  0.0555  0.04
Random 1    64  0.0052  0.0064  0.0264  0.028  0.4233  0.09
Random 2   63  0.0846  0.0063  0.0461  0.0418  0.3628  0.12
Random 3   65  -0.0349  0.0065  0.0265  0.0229  0.1742  0.06

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).