Levy 1951

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   42  0.3120  0.0144  0.0647  0.0657  0.0554  0.05
Ashkenazy 1981   60  0.1865  0.0060  0.0553  0.0560  0.0463  0.04
Beliavsky 2004   61  0.1554  0.0061  0.0460  0.0441  0.0843  0.06
BenOr 1989   10  0.4228  0.0011  0.155  0.6528  0.3510  0.48
Biret 1990   21  0.3932  0.0029  0.0925  0.3339  0.0725  0.15
Blet 2003   48  0.2863  0.0053  0.0554  0.0557  0.0553  0.05
Block 1995   45  0.2947  0.0049  0.0738  0.0754  0.0455  0.05
Brailowsky 1960   1  0.474  0.103  0.211  0.6817  0.552  0.61
Chiu 1999   46  0.2955  0.0054  0.0649  0.0662  0.0359  0.04
Clidat 1994   38  0.3437  0.0035  0.0836  0.0852  0.0544  0.06
Cohen 1997   62  0.1339  0.0062  0.0362  0.0358  0.0365  0.03
Coop 1987   20  0.3940  0.0030  0.1119  0.3743  0.0624  0.15
Cortot 1951   57  0.2549  0.0050  0.0557  0.0531  0.1835  0.09
Czerny 1949   19  0.3916  0.0112  0.167  0.5918  0.419  0.49
Czerny 1949b   32  0.3617  0.0119  0.0821  0.3523  0.3116  0.33
Ezaki 2006   6  0.435  0.064  0.154  0.6616  0.591  0.62
Falvay 1989   31  0.3641  0.0021  0.0832  0.2240  0.0634  0.11
Ferenczy 1958   4  0.452  0.142  0.169  0.5621  0.478  0.51
Fiorentino 1962   36  0.3456  0.0038  0.0739  0.0737  0.0937  0.08
Fliere 1977   40  0.3250  0.0042  0.0552  0.0552  0.0549  0.05
Fou 1978   9  0.428  0.036  0.196  0.6416  0.573  0.60
Francois 1956   59  0.2444  0.0046  0.0643  0.0642  0.0558  0.05
Hatto 1997   49  0.2859  0.0057  0.0642  0.0658  0.0360  0.04
Horowitz 1971   28  0.3724  0.0034  0.0933  0.0952  0.0540  0.07
Horowitz 1985   11  0.426  0.0513  0.208  0.569  0.516  0.53
Indjic 2001   53  0.2762  0.0058  0.0644  0.0655  0.0362  0.04
Kapell 1951   29  0.3653  0.0033  0.0834  0.0830  0.2427  0.14
Kiepura 1999   12  0.4160  0.0024  0.0715  0.4453  0.0522  0.15
Kilenyi 1937   18  0.3933  0.0023  0.0816  0.4331  0.1318  0.24
Kissin 1993   58  0.2464  0.0059  0.0645  0.0648  0.0551  0.05
Kitain 1937   54  0.2730  0.0041  0.0556  0.0542  0.0748  0.06
Kushner 1990   22  0.3834  0.0025  0.0731  0.2440  0.0729  0.13
Levy 1951   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Luisada 1990   47  0.2936  0.0043  0.0559  0.0538  0.0745  0.06
Lushtak 2004   33  0.3618  0.0131  0.1129  0.2748  0.0631  0.13
Lympany 1968   23  0.3811  0.0218  0.0924  0.3425  0.3315  0.33
Magaloff 1977   52  0.2842  0.0052  0.0461  0.0453  0.0461  0.04
Magaloff 1977b   55  0.2648  0.0056  0.0741  0.0747  0.0547  0.06
Magin 1975   35  0.3512  0.0220  0.1127  0.3140  0.0920  0.17
Milkina 1970   26  0.3722  0.0114  0.1418  0.4040  0.0623  0.15
Mohovich 1999   43  0.3145  0.0047  0.0551  0.0550  0.0556  0.05
Nadelmann 1956   7  0.4313  0.029  0.1217  0.4339  0.0721  0.17
Ohlsson 1999   44  0.3038  0.0048  0.0550  0.0546  0.0550  0.05
Olejniczac 1990   39  0.3423  0.0139  0.0737  0.0737  0.0936  0.08
Olejniczak 1991   34  0.3543  0.0037  0.0835  0.0855  0.0638  0.07
Osinska 1989   3  0.451  0.211  0.213  0.6725  0.407  0.52
Paderewski 1912   30  0.3615  0.0117  0.0920  0.3520  0.3117  0.33
Perahia 1994   8  0.433  0.117  0.1514  0.4621  0.3411  0.40
Perlemuter 1986   24  0.3825  0.0026  0.0623  0.3438  0.0628  0.14
Poblocka 1999   14  0.4031  0.0016  0.2210  0.5524  0.2812  0.39
Rangell 2001   56  0.2551  0.0055  0.0648  0.0652  0.0557  0.05
Risler 1920   51  0.2826  0.0051  0.0558  0.0538  0.0742  0.06
Rosen 1989   25  0.3819  0.0115  0.1611  0.5417  0.595  0.56
Rubinstein 1939   27  0.3729  0.0028  0.0728  0.3037  0.0726  0.14
Rubinstein 1952   17  0.4057  0.0027  0.0722  0.3450  0.0433  0.12
Rubinstein 1966   16  0.4014  0.0122  0.0726  0.3255  0.0530  0.13
Rummel 1943   37  0.3427  0.0036  0.0740  0.0736  0.0646  0.06
Shebanova 2002   13  0.4021  0.0110  0.1312  0.5327  0.2914  0.39
Smith 1975   15  0.409  0.038  0.2313  0.4611  0.3313  0.39
Szpilman 1948   50  0.2835  0.0040  0.0555  0.0537  0.0841  0.06
Uninsky 1971   41  0.3146  0.0045  0.0646  0.0657  0.0452  0.05
Wasowski 1980   2  0.457  0.045  0.152  0.689  0.484  0.57
Weissenberg 1971   5  0.4410  0.0332  0.1230  0.2429  0.1519  0.19
Random 1    64  0.0261  0.0064  0.0264  0.0219  0.2539  0.07
Random 2   65  -0.0258  0.0065  0.0265  0.0248  0.0564  0.03
Random 3   63  0.0752  0.0063  0.0363  0.035  0.4632  0.12

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).