Ashkenazy 1981

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   36  0.8133  0.0024  0.0922  0.2616  0.495  0.36
Ashkenazy 1981   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Beliavsky 2004   54  0.7457  0.0058  0.0462  0.0453  0.0462  0.04
BenOr 1989   7  0.8618  0.0118  0.139  0.4451  0.0528  0.15
Biret 1990   42  0.8017  0.0137  0.0648  0.0612  0.3929  0.15
Blet 2003   25  0.8252  0.0034  0.0644  0.0639  0.0750  0.06
Block 1995   41  0.8031  0.0044  0.0553  0.0532  0.1637  0.09
Brailowsky 1960   51  0.7658  0.0054  0.0643  0.0648  0.0646  0.06
Chiu 1999   43  0.7925  0.0038  0.0646  0.0633  0.1139  0.08
Clidat 1994   28  0.8228  0.0023  0.0928  0.1730  0.1130  0.14
Cohen 1997   61  0.6454  0.0061  0.0549  0.056  0.5426  0.16
Coop 1987   32  0.8243  0.0035  0.0738  0.0739  0.0941  0.08
Cortot 1951   52  0.7659  0.0055  0.0464  0.0433  0.0759  0.05
Czerny 1949   34  0.8222  0.007  0.1214  0.3839  0.0725  0.16
Czerny 1949b   16  0.853  0.143  0.294  0.5617  0.413  0.48
Ezaki 2006   5  0.8614  0.0110  0.126  0.5039  0.0818  0.20
Falvay 1989   40  0.8036  0.0043  0.0736  0.0742  0.0842  0.07
Ferenczy 1958   57  0.7063  0.0052  0.0460  0.0439  0.0754  0.05
Fiorentino 1962   23  0.8330  0.0032  0.0731  0.1344  0.0638  0.09
Fliere 1977   11  0.8632  0.0019  0.1316  0.3638  0.0723  0.16
Fou 1978   15  0.856  0.0220  0.0920  0.3230  0.1416  0.21
Francois 1956   49  0.7720  0.0047  0.0554  0.0548  0.0560  0.05
Hatto 1997   44  0.7960  0.0026  0.0924  0.2217  0.3511  0.28
Horowitz 1971   30  0.8237  0.0039  0.0645  0.0624  0.2333  0.12
Horowitz 1985   60  0.6526  0.0062  0.0647  0.0641  0.0744  0.06
Indjic 2001   45  0.7923  0.0025  0.0823  0.2313  0.3610  0.29
Kapell 1951   17  0.8510  0.019  0.138  0.4830  0.1512  0.27
Kiepura 1999   39  0.8127  0.0046  0.0550  0.0547  0.0553  0.05
Kilenyi 1937   12  0.8513  0.018  0.117  0.4930  0.227  0.33
Kissin 1993   10  0.8611  0.0114  0.115  0.5239  0.0821  0.20
Kitain 1937   63  0.4651  0.0063  0.0551  0.0546  0.0558  0.05
Kushner 1990   26  0.829  0.0129  0.0630  0.1438  0.0735  0.10
Levy 1951   56  0.7264  0.0059  0.0457  0.0429  0.1640  0.08
Luisada 1990   24  0.8341  0.0036  0.0641  0.0653  0.0555  0.05
Lushtak 2004   8  0.8615  0.0116  0.1112  0.4130  0.1413  0.24
Lympany 1968   31  0.8240  0.0031  0.0532  0.1231  0.1431  0.13
Magaloff 1977   13  0.8549  0.0021  0.0918  0.3442  0.0727  0.15
Magaloff 1977b   14  0.8538  0.0022  0.1319  0.3332  0.1317  0.21
Magin 1975   3  0.884  0.034  0.303  0.6121  0.472  0.54
Milkina 1970   35  0.8144  0.0042  0.0834  0.0844  0.0549  0.06
Mohovich 1999   33  0.8248  0.0040  0.0835  0.0836  0.0743  0.07
Nadelmann 1956   47  0.7835  0.0048  0.0555  0.0551  0.0463  0.04
Ohlsson 1999   29  0.825  0.0211  0.1021  0.2815  0.436  0.35
Olejniczac 1990   22  0.8434  0.0030  0.0529  0.1540  0.0736  0.10
Olejniczak 1991   4  0.8746  0.005  0.0911  0.4328  0.199  0.29
Osinska 1989   2  0.901  0.291  0.291  0.789  0.431  0.58
Paderewski 1912   46  0.7921  0.0045  0.0737  0.0737  0.0652  0.06
Perahia 1994   62  0.6155  0.0049  0.0456  0.0435  0.0756  0.05
Perlemuter 1986   20  0.847  0.0213  0.0913  0.3831  0.1120  0.20
Poblocka 1999   9  0.8645  0.0015  0.1315  0.3732  0.1119  0.20
Rangell 2001   6  0.8653  0.006  0.1010  0.4413  0.484  0.46
Risler 1920   55  0.7261  0.0060  0.0458  0.0449  0.0561  0.04
Rosen 1989   48  0.7747  0.0057  0.0459  0.0453  0.0565  0.04
Rubinstein 1939   59  0.6919  0.0051  0.0740  0.0743  0.0647  0.06
Rubinstein 1952   19  0.8412  0.0127  0.0826  0.2023  0.2714  0.23
Rubinstein 1966   50  0.7739  0.0050  0.0739  0.0739  0.0551  0.06
Rummel 1943   58  0.7056  0.0056  0.0463  0.0455  0.0464  0.04
Shebanova 2002   18  0.8516  0.0117  0.1017  0.3534  0.0724  0.16
Smith 1975   21  0.8424  0.0028  0.0627  0.1949  0.0534  0.10
Szpilman 1948   37  0.8142  0.0033  0.0642  0.0637  0.0745  0.06
Uninsky 1971   27  0.828  0.0112  0.1225  0.2229  0.1322  0.17
Wasowski 1980   38  0.8150  0.0041  0.0933  0.099  0.4815  0.21
Weissenberg 1971   53  0.7529  0.0053  0.0552  0.0542  0.0848  0.06
Average   1  0.912  0.292  0.382  0.7531  0.148  0.32
Random 1    65  -0.1062  0.0065  0.0265  0.0235  0.0666  0.03
Random 2   64  0.1065  0.0064  0.0461  0.046  0.3732  0.12
Random 3   66  -0.1266  0.0066  0.0166  0.0114  0.2357  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).