Chiu 1999

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   52  0.7018  0.0150  0.0557  0.0549  0.0555  0.05
Ashkenazy 1981   32  0.7943  0.0039  0.1133  0.1146  0.0642  0.08
Beliavsky 2004   43  0.7327  0.0045  0.0742  0.0730  0.1636  0.11
BenOr 1989   23  0.8542  0.0022  0.1016  0.3731  0.1427  0.23
Biret 1990   53  0.7048  0.0048  0.0558  0.0552  0.0559  0.05
Blet 2003   28  0.8255  0.0036  0.0839  0.0840  0.0645  0.07
Block 1995   16  0.8719  0.0120  0.1124  0.309  0.4815  0.38
Brailowsky 1960   56  0.6445  0.0056  0.0645  0.0660  0.0361  0.04
Chiu 1999   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Clidat 1994   27  0.8214  0.0128  0.0728  0.1932  0.1032  0.14
Cohen 1997   59  0.5152  0.0058  0.0461  0.0458  0.0464  0.04
Coop 1987   2  0.9431  0.003  0.214  0.6010  0.564  0.58
Cortot 1951   42  0.7439  0.0051  0.0460  0.0423  0.2538  0.10
Czerny 1949   39  0.7521  0.0113  0.1521  0.3325  0.3216  0.32
Czerny 1949b   30  0.8029  0.0017  0.1425  0.2929  0.2224  0.25
Ezaki 2006   1  0.951  0.411  0.403  0.656  0.651  0.65
Falvay 1989   4  0.9323  0.016  0.237  0.569  0.526  0.54
Ferenczy 1958   34  0.7950  0.0019  0.0927  0.2115  0.3919  0.29
Fiorentino 1962   20  0.8657  0.0024  0.1219  0.3324  0.2423  0.28
Fliere 1977   22  0.8512  0.0116  0.1215  0.4324  0.2217  0.31
Fou 1978   19  0.8640  0.0025  0.0923  0.3026  0.2025  0.24
Francois 1956   54  0.6761  0.0054  0.0552  0.0564  0.0366  0.04
Hatto 1997   48  0.7141  0.0037  0.1035  0.1031  0.1433  0.12
Horowitz 1971   45  0.7320  0.0152  0.0643  0.0642  0.0649  0.06
Horowitz 1985   61  0.4937  0.0061  0.0462  0.0457  0.0560  0.04
Indjic 2001   49  0.7115  0.0138  0.0936  0.0931  0.1337  0.11
Kapell 1951   9  0.915  0.0311  0.2212  0.5013  0.5310  0.51
Kiepura 1999   31  0.7949  0.0033  0.0938  0.0923  0.3730  0.18
Kilenyi 1937   8  0.9132  0.007  0.309  0.5210  0.538  0.52
Kissin 1993   3  0.933  0.115  0.181  0.709  0.445  0.55
Kitain 1937   63  0.3446  0.0063  0.0559  0.0552  0.0558  0.05
Kushner 1990   41  0.7433  0.0042  0.0646  0.0652  0.0452  0.05
Levy 1951   51  0.7024  0.0155  0.0549  0.0531  0.1540  0.09
Luisada 1990   25  0.8325  0.0027  0.0826  0.2226  0.2526  0.23
Lushtak 2004   17  0.878  0.0226  0.1318  0.3424  0.2520  0.29
Lympany 1968   35  0.7654  0.0041  0.0644  0.0658  0.0450  0.05
Magaloff 1977   12  0.8826  0.0014  0.1213  0.486  0.4912  0.48
Magaloff 1977b   13  0.8834  0.0015  0.1414  0.478  0.4813  0.47
Magin 1975   10  0.8910  0.019  0.218  0.5316  0.547  0.53
Milkina 1970   44  0.7322  0.0147  0.0556  0.0553  0.0462  0.04
Mohovich 1999   46  0.7262  0.0043  0.0551  0.0552  0.0557  0.05
Nadelmann 1956   55  0.659  0.0149  0.0555  0.0535  0.0653  0.05
Ohlsson 1999   15  0.8711  0.0118  0.0822  0.329  0.5314  0.41
Olejniczac 1990   21  0.8565  0.0023  0.1020  0.3324  0.2422  0.28
Olejniczak 1991   18  0.8736  0.0021  0.0817  0.3526  0.2418  0.29
Osinska 1989   33  0.7947  0.0040  0.1134  0.1153  0.0544  0.07
Paderewski 1912   38  0.7617  0.0134  0.0840  0.0831  0.1935  0.12
Perahia 1994   62  0.3858  0.0062  0.0364  0.0342  0.0663  0.04
Perlemuter 1986   40  0.7535  0.0029  0.0829  0.1647  0.0541  0.09
Poblocka 1999   6  0.9213  0.012  0.175  0.6011  0.653  0.62
Rangell 2001   7  0.9144  0.0010  0.2110  0.5211  0.539  0.52
Risler 1920   26  0.837  0.0231  0.0730  0.1513  0.5221  0.28
Rosen 1989   24  0.8553  0.0030  0.0731  0.1414  0.3328  0.21
Rubinstein 1939   60  0.5016  0.0160  0.0550  0.0545  0.0651  0.05
Rubinstein 1952   47  0.7251  0.0053  0.0548  0.0561  0.0365  0.04
Rubinstein 1966   57  0.6330  0.0057  0.0647  0.0645  0.0454  0.05
Rummel 1943   58  0.5564  0.0059  0.0553  0.0540  0.0556  0.05
Shebanova 2002   14  0.8828  0.0012  0.1411  0.5012  0.4711  0.48
Smith 1975   36  0.7660  0.0044  0.0841  0.0850  0.0546  0.06
Szpilman 1948   37  0.7666  0.0035  0.0937  0.0938  0.0643  0.07
Uninsky 1971   29  0.8038  0.0032  0.0732  0.1325  0.1831  0.15
Wasowski 1980   50  0.706  0.0246  0.0554  0.0526  0.1839  0.09
Weissenberg 1971   5  0.922  0.124  0.196  0.585  0.692  0.63
Average   11  0.894  0.088  0.242  0.6944  0.0629  0.20
Random 1    65  -0.0763  0.0065  0.0265  0.0223  0.1647  0.06
Random 2   64  0.1059  0.0064  0.0463  0.047  0.3534  0.12
Random 3   66  -0.1256  0.0066  0.0166  0.018  0.3348  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).