Afanassiev 2001

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Ashkenazy 1981   13  0.8120  0.0120  0.1416  0.4922  0.2610  0.36
Beliavsky 2004   23  0.7833  0.0016  0.1318  0.475  0.494  0.48
BenOr 1989   19  0.7917  0.0125  0.1021  0.4060  0.0432  0.13
Biret 1990   21  0.7828  0.0043  0.0645  0.0640  0.0647  0.06
Blet 2003   12  0.8218  0.019  0.1314  0.5015  0.269  0.36
Block 1995   57  0.6754  0.0055  0.0364  0.0352  0.0563  0.04
Brailowsky 1960   41  0.7455  0.0057  0.0457  0.0453  0.0557  0.04
Chiu 1999   55  0.7041  0.0048  0.0549  0.0557  0.0551  0.05
Clidat 1994   24  0.7845  0.0023  0.0924  0.3460  0.0529  0.13
Cohen 1997   52  0.7158  0.0050  0.0551  0.052  0.5925  0.17
Coop 1987   51  0.7124  0.0047  0.0936  0.0951  0.0542  0.07
Cortot 1951   46  0.7242  0.0058  0.0362  0.0359  0.0466  0.03
Czerny 1949   48  0.7240  0.0028  0.0928  0.2058  0.0437  0.09
Czerny 1949b   26  0.7725  0.0014  0.117  0.5541  0.0624  0.18
Ezaki 2006   32  0.7613  0.0238  0.1133  0.1160  0.0440  0.07
Falvay 1989   49  0.7243  0.0051  0.0553  0.0559  0.0552  0.05
Ferenczy 1958   37  0.7644  0.0040  0.0643  0.0649  0.0554  0.05
Fiorentino 1962   31  0.7650  0.0034  0.1134  0.1151  0.0639  0.08
Fliere 1977   10  0.8223  0.0110  0.098  0.5433  0.0918  0.22
Fou 1978   36  0.7619  0.0137  0.1035  0.1059  0.0443  0.06
Francois 1956   43  0.7435  0.0021  0.1125  0.3012  0.4111  0.35
Hatto 1997   5  0.8346  0.0015  0.1412  0.528  0.473  0.49
Horowitz 1971   3  0.848  0.044  0.146  0.575  0.561  0.56
Horowitz 1985   44  0.7415  0.0135  0.0740  0.077  0.5821  0.20
Indjic 2001   4  0.8332  0.0012  0.1211  0.538  0.482  0.50
Kapell 1951   40  0.7456  0.0039  0.0838  0.0856  0.0544  0.06
Kiepura 1999   39  0.7557  0.0046  0.0741  0.0734  0.0741  0.07
Kilenyi 1937   42  0.7427  0.0027  0.0926  0.3039  0.0728  0.14
Kissin 1993   11  0.8214  0.0111  0.114  0.6147  0.0622  0.19
Kitain 1937   63  0.3622  0.0162  0.0458  0.0413  0.4031  0.13
Kushner 1990   20  0.7910  0.038  0.1119  0.4320  0.2015  0.29
Levy 1951   59  0.6636  0.0061  0.0360  0.0342  0.0559  0.04
Luisada 1990   33  0.7647  0.0029  0.0831  0.1751  0.0538  0.09
Lushtak 2004   18  0.7963  0.0022  0.1620  0.4159  0.0430  0.13
Lympany 1968   27  0.7749  0.0045  0.0642  0.0647  0.0548  0.05
Magaloff 1977   6  0.839  0.0317  0.1110  0.5330  0.1812  0.31
Magaloff 1977b   7  0.8316  0.0118  0.1113  0.5128  0.1913  0.31
Magin 1975   47  0.7251  0.0052  0.0454  0.0461  0.0461  0.04
Milkina 1970   9  0.8321  0.0119  0.1215  0.4917  0.357  0.41
Mohovich 1999   35  0.7637  0.0030  0.1130  0.2054  0.0535  0.10
Nadelmann 1956   34  0.764  0.087  0.0927  0.2322  0.2916  0.26
Ohlsson 1999   54  0.7038  0.0049  0.0550  0.0548  0.0553  0.05
Olejniczac 1990   30  0.7759  0.0033  0.0837  0.0855  0.0545  0.06
Olejniczak 1991   29  0.7765  0.0044  0.0546  0.0562  0.0460  0.04
Osinska 1989   2  0.853  0.122  0.211  0.7332  0.1214  0.30
Paderewski 1912   15  0.805  0.056  0.1017  0.4819  0.298  0.37
Perahia 1994   61  0.6552  0.0056  0.0361  0.0315  0.3234  0.10
Perlemuter 1986   22  0.7812  0.0213  0.099  0.5457  0.0426  0.15
Poblocka 1999   50  0.7148  0.0053  0.0548  0.0554  0.0550  0.05
Rangell 2001   56  0.7062  0.0054  0.0359  0.0364  0.0365  0.03
Risler 1920   60  0.6553  0.0063  0.0547  0.0561  0.0458  0.04
Rosen 1989   38  0.7529  0.0041  0.0644  0.0636  0.0646  0.06
Rubinstein 1939   45  0.737  0.0531  0.0832  0.1618  0.3217  0.23
Rubinstein 1952   28  0.7731  0.0036  0.0739  0.0746  0.0456  0.05
Rubinstein 1966   17  0.8030  0.0032  0.1029  0.2025  0.2220  0.21
Rummel 1943   62  0.5839  0.0060  0.0363  0.0350  0.0464  0.03
Shebanova 2002   16  0.8011  0.0224  0.1022  0.3740  0.0627  0.15
Smith 1975   14  0.816  0.055  0.105  0.5916  0.375  0.47
Szpilman 1948   8  0.832  0.163  0.193  0.6318  0.326  0.45
Uninsky 1971   25  0.7766  0.0026  0.0923  0.3533  0.1023  0.19
Wasowski 1980   53  0.7026  0.0042  0.0552  0.0536  0.0649  0.05
Weissenberg 1971   58  0.6734  0.0059  0.0456  0.0460  0.0462  0.04
Average   1  0.851  0.191  0.182  0.7037  0.0719  0.22
Random 1    65  -0.0360  0.0065  0.0265  0.025  0.4236  0.09
Random 2   64  0.1664  0.0064  0.0455  0.0417  0.2333  0.10
Random 3   66  -0.0561  0.0066  0.0166  0.0113  0.2355  0.05

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).