Fiorentino 1962

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   48  0.3133  0.0042  0.0847  0.0840  0.0640  0.07
Ashkenazy 1981   57  0.2550  0.0054  0.0846  0.0841  0.0642  0.07
Beliavsky 2004   64  0.0341  0.0062  0.0362  0.0357  0.0362  0.03
BenOr 1989   14  0.4416  0.0016  0.1117  0.4834  0.1425  0.26
Biret 1990   24  0.3942  0.0023  0.0921  0.3738  0.0728  0.16
Blet 2003   4  0.5760  0.004  0.364  0.743  0.743  0.74
Block 1995   26  0.3934  0.0014  0.1518  0.4513  0.4017  0.42
Brailowsky 1960   13  0.479  0.0013  0.2312  0.6219  0.5010  0.56
Chiu 1999   49  0.3043  0.0044  0.0845  0.0844  0.0544  0.06
Clidat 1994   36  0.3561  0.0032  0.0932  0.1731  0.1332  0.15
Cohen 1997   61  0.1351  0.0061  0.0461  0.0460  0.0364  0.03
Coop 1987   7  0.5044  0.009  0.287  0.7115  0.479  0.58
Cortot 1951   62  0.0830  0.0064  0.0264  0.0259  0.0366  0.02
Czerny 1949   22  0.4035  0.0018  0.1515  0.4925  0.2719  0.36
Czerny 1949b   25  0.3936  0.0028  0.0928  0.3021  0.3222  0.31
Ezaki 2006   20  0.414  0.0022  0.1419  0.4526  0.4415  0.44
Falvay 1989   16  0.4220  0.0015  0.1614  0.5319  0.4713  0.50
Ferenczy 1958   10  0.4914  0.006  0.3010  0.678  0.676  0.67
Fiorentino 1962   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Fliere 1977   32  0.373  0.0031  0.1030  0.2318  0.4221  0.31
Fou 1978   18  0.426  0.0027  0.1325  0.3526  0.4218  0.38
Francois 1956   58  0.2462  0.0058  0.0843  0.0860  0.0451  0.06
Hatto 1997   51  0.2963  0.0050  0.0556  0.0550  0.0554  0.05
Horowitz 1971   41  0.3323  0.0039  0.0844  0.0851  0.0550  0.06
Horowitz 1985   33  0.3745  0.0017  0.1020  0.3819  0.2920  0.33
Indjic 2001   52  0.2964  0.0051  0.0751  0.0751  0.0456  0.05
Kapell 1951   30  0.3924  0.0034  0.1034  0.1029  0.2330  0.15
Kiepura 1999   17  0.4237  0.0026  0.1124  0.3533  0.0927  0.18
Kilenyi 1937   9  0.4915  0.008  0.258  0.695  0.734  0.71
Kissin 1993   56  0.2652  0.0057  0.0654  0.0654  0.0453  0.05
Kitain 1937   59  0.1911  0.0059  0.0655  0.0656  0.0458  0.05
Kushner 1990   34  0.3626  0.0038  0.1035  0.1045  0.0637  0.08
Levy 1951   38  0.3438  0.0045  0.0938  0.0940  0.0736  0.08
Luisada 1990   11  0.4825  0.007  0.2213  0.624  0.677  0.64
Lushtak 2004   53  0.2853  0.0047  0.0560  0.0559  0.0459  0.04
Lympany 1968   46  0.3146  0.0048  0.0749  0.0742  0.0643  0.06
Magaloff 1977   54  0.2839  0.0056  0.0750  0.0751  0.0455  0.05
Magaloff 1977b   55  0.2713  0.0055  0.0559  0.0543  0.0557  0.05
Magin 1975   5  0.5717  0.005  0.475  0.727  0.665  0.69
Milkina 1970   42  0.3365  0.0035  0.0841  0.0861  0.0446  0.06
Mohovich 1999   43  0.325  0.0052  0.0939  0.0937  0.0641  0.07
Nadelmann 1956   15  0.4454  0.0025  0.1122  0.3645  0.0631  0.15
Ohlsson 1999   29  0.3927  0.0036  0.0848  0.0845  0.0547  0.06
Olejniczac 1990   1  0.961  0.991  0.981  1.001  1.001  1.00
Olejniczak 1991   2  0.802  0.002  0.902  0.952  0.962  0.95
Osinska 1989   8  0.5047  0.0012  0.236  0.7124  0.3911  0.53
Paderewski 1912   47  0.3118  0.0053  0.0940  0.0953  0.0448  0.06
Perahia 1994   50  0.3031  0.0049  0.0557  0.0558  0.0460  0.04
Perlemuter 1986   21  0.4155  0.0029  0.0831  0.1744  0.0635  0.10
Poblocka 1999   44  0.3221  0.0041  0.0753  0.0756  0.0452  0.05
Rangell 2001   60  0.1628  0.0060  0.0558  0.0563  0.0361  0.04
Risler 1920   39  0.3412  0.0021  0.0927  0.349  0.5116  0.42
Rosen 1989   19  0.4256  0.0019  0.1216  0.4819  0.5812  0.53
Rubinstein 1939   45  0.3257  0.0046  0.0752  0.0749  0.0545  0.06
Rubinstein 1952   12  0.487  0.0010  0.2011  0.6314  0.558  0.59
Rubinstein 1966   6  0.5140  0.0011  0.229  0.6922  0.3214  0.47
Rummel 1943   31  0.3710  0.0040  0.0842  0.0846  0.0549  0.06
Shebanova 2002   27  0.3932  0.0030  0.0929  0.2441  0.0733  0.13
Smith 1975   28  0.398  0.0024  0.0923  0.3524  0.2424  0.29
Szpilman 1948   37  0.3548  0.0043  0.1233  0.1232  0.1234  0.12
Uninsky 1971   40  0.3358  0.0037  0.0937  0.0948  0.0539  0.07
Wasowski 1980   23  0.4029  0.0020  0.1026  0.3534  0.1026  0.19
Weissenberg 1971   35  0.3666  0.0033  0.1036  0.1026  0.2229  0.15
Average   3  0.6349  0.003  0.343  0.8934  0.1023  0.30
Random 1    66  0.0122  0.0066  0.0166  0.0134  0.0665  0.02
Random 2   65  0.0359  0.0063  0.0263  0.0217  0.3638  0.08
Random 3   63  0.0519  0.0065  0.0265  0.0241  0.0663  0.03

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).