Kiepura 1999

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   60  0.3133  0.0057  0.0363  0.0350  0.0563  0.04
Ashkenazy 1981   52  0.3458  0.0056  0.0462  0.0433  0.0856  0.06
Beliavsky 2004   47  0.3636  0.0050  0.0553  0.0515  0.4334  0.15
BenOr 1989   27  0.4253  0.0022  0.0719  0.3137  0.1029  0.18
Biret 1990   34  0.4140  0.0024  0.0828  0.1647  0.0543  0.09
Blet 2003   35  0.4021  0.0014  0.1618  0.3523  0.4617  0.40
Block 1995   10  0.4920  0.0011  0.209  0.603  0.637  0.61
Brailowsky 1960   7  0.509  0.018  0.128  0.6113  0.625  0.61
Chiu 1999   40  0.3956  0.0048  0.0543  0.0528  0.2142  0.10
Clidat 1994   18  0.4522  0.0023  0.0824  0.2317  0.3524  0.28
Cohen 1997   63  0.1825  0.0063  0.0555  0.0546  0.0660  0.05
Coop 1987   30  0.4244  0.0040  0.0547  0.0538  0.0752  0.06
Cortot 1951   32  0.414  0.0230  0.0729  0.148  0.6323  0.30
Czerny 1949   2  0.577  0.012  0.193  0.687  0.702  0.69
Czerny 1949b   4  0.5419  0.006  0.155  0.663  0.801  0.73
Ezaki 2006   13  0.4735  0.0018  0.1016  0.4523  0.4816  0.46
Falvay 1989   15  0.462  0.065  0.1510  0.576  0.638  0.60
Ferenczy 1958   51  0.3537  0.0042  0.0548  0.0548  0.0754  0.06
Fiorentino 1962   28  0.4249  0.0033  0.0933  0.0924  0.3528  0.18
Fliere 1977   21  0.4438  0.0028  0.0627  0.199  0.5022  0.31
Fou 1978   20  0.4448  0.0026  0.0721  0.2624  0.4519  0.34
Francois 1956   62  0.2851  0.0062  0.0461  0.0462  0.0366  0.03
Hatto 1997   53  0.3429  0.0054  0.0550  0.0537  0.0945  0.07
Horowitz 1971   6  0.5117  0.0016  0.2314  0.4912  0.5115  0.50
Horowitz 1985   12  0.4831  0.0015  0.1612  0.534  0.6211  0.57
Indjic 2001   55  0.3326  0.0055  0.0551  0.0536  0.0946  0.07
Kapell 1951   36  0.4018  0.0035  0.0734  0.0723  0.3931  0.17
Kiepura 1999   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Kilenyi 1937   46  0.3630  0.0045  0.0549  0.0538  0.0855  0.06
Kissin 1993   11  0.498  0.0110  0.1511  0.557  0.676  0.61
Kitain 1937   54  0.3347  0.0044  0.0458  0.0419  0.4138  0.13
Kushner 1990   45  0.3739  0.0047  0.0545  0.0542  0.0753  0.06
Levy 1951   33  0.4142  0.0039  0.0554  0.0517  0.4036  0.14
Luisada 1990   14  0.4732  0.0017  0.2015  0.479  0.6112  0.54
Lushtak 2004   8  0.5012  0.017  0.154  0.679  0.623  0.64
Lympany 1968   19  0.456  0.0125  0.0826  0.2012  0.5220  0.32
Magaloff 1977   48  0.3557  0.0053  0.0638  0.0614  0.4035  0.15
Magaloff 1977b   50  0.3545  0.0052  0.0457  0.047  0.4237  0.13
Magin 1975   3  0.543  0.023  0.326  0.6414  0.614  0.62
Milkina 1970   37  0.4015  0.009  0.1217  0.3828  0.2721  0.32
Mohovich 1999   61  0.3061  0.0060  0.0459  0.0459  0.0464  0.04
Nadelmann 1956   9  0.5011  0.014  0.202  0.697  0.529  0.60
Ohlsson 1999   58  0.3146  0.0059  0.0552  0.0540  0.0658  0.05
Olejniczac 1990   29  0.4266  0.0032  0.0731  0.1424  0.4027  0.24
Olejniczak 1991   41  0.3954  0.0037  0.0637  0.0651  0.0650  0.06
Osinska 1989   5  0.5216  0.0013  0.207  0.6322  0.4313  0.52
Paderewski 1912   38  0.3955  0.0034  0.0735  0.0712  0.3832  0.16
Perahia 1994   23  0.4313  0.0127  0.0630  0.1437  0.0841  0.11
Perlemuter 1986   22  0.4462  0.0031  0.0632  0.1232  0.1239  0.12
Poblocka 1999   26  0.4323  0.0020  0.0822  0.2524  0.2426  0.24
Rangell 2001   56  0.3224  0.0061  0.0641  0.0643  0.0561  0.05
Risler 1920   57  0.3234  0.0049  0.0456  0.0417  0.3040  0.11
Rosen 1989   49  0.3550  0.0051  0.0639  0.0628  0.4333  0.16
Rubinstein 1939   44  0.3827  0.0043  0.0640  0.0637  0.0751  0.06
Rubinstein 1952   43  0.3863  0.0041  0.0546  0.0539  0.0562  0.05
Rubinstein 1966   39  0.3959  0.0038  0.0544  0.0551  0.0559  0.05
Rummel 1943   24  0.435  0.0219  0.0923  0.2515  0.3025  0.27
Shebanova 2002   16  0.4610  0.0112  0.1713  0.5315  0.5014  0.51
Smith 1975   25  0.4314  0.0129  0.0825  0.2330  0.1330  0.17
Szpilman 1948   59  0.3164  0.0058  0.0460  0.0436  0.0949  0.06
Uninsky 1971   17  0.4543  0.0021  0.0720  0.2815  0.5018  0.37
Wasowski 1980   31  0.4241  0.0036  0.0636  0.0644  0.0648  0.06
Weissenberg 1971   42  0.3960  0.0046  0.0542  0.0547  0.0657  0.05
Average   1  0.661  0.751  0.741  0.9116  0.3910  0.60
Random 1    65  0.0065  0.0066  0.0166  0.0132  0.1265  0.03
Random 2   66  -0.0228  0.0064  0.0265  0.0221  0.2944  0.08
Random 3   64  0.0352  0.0065  0.0264  0.0216  0.2647  0.07

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).