Afanassiev 2001

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Ashkenazy 1981   5  0.7217  0.015  0.118  0.5617  0.357  0.44
Beliavsky 2004   30  0.6435  0.0022  0.1321  0.378  0.518  0.43
BenOr 1989   17  0.6714  0.0112  0.1020  0.3752  0.0631  0.15
Biret 1990   26  0.6537  0.0042  0.0550  0.0561  0.0466  0.04
Blet 2003   36  0.6359  0.0041  0.1033  0.1031  0.1036  0.10
Block 1995   53  0.5745  0.0055  0.0458  0.0441  0.0661  0.05
Brailowsky 1960   61  0.5050  0.0063  0.0547  0.0557  0.0555  0.05
Chiu 1999   44  0.6234  0.0038  0.0739  0.0747  0.0651  0.06
Clidat 1994   19  0.6739  0.0024  0.1119  0.3859  0.0533  0.14
Cohen 1997   59  0.5748  0.0057  0.0462  0.048  0.6029  0.15
Coop 1987   25  0.659  0.0123  0.1217  0.4236  0.0725  0.17
Cortot 1951   60  0.5560  0.0062  0.0644  0.0636  0.0848  0.07
Czerny 1949   42  0.6253  0.0021  0.0824  0.3339  0.0728  0.15
Czerny 1949b   27  0.6530  0.0010  0.1512  0.5028  0.1619  0.28
Ezaki 2006   20  0.6718  0.0028  0.1128  0.2743  0.0732  0.14
Falvay 1989   28  0.646  0.0131  0.0832  0.1537  0.0935  0.12
Ferenczy 1958   58  0.5757  0.0058  0.0463  0.0444  0.0659  0.05
Fiorentino 1962   29  0.6433  0.0036  0.0838  0.0845  0.0747  0.07
Fliere 1977   9  0.6952  0.006  0.139  0.5631  0.1717  0.31
Fou 1978   35  0.6319  0.0039  0.0837  0.0856  0.0553  0.06
Francois 1956   34  0.6331  0.0016  0.0925  0.316  0.5511  0.41
Hatto 1997   8  0.7043  0.0014  0.0914  0.469  0.535  0.49
Horowitz 1971   24  0.667  0.0127  0.1229  0.2613  0.4515  0.34
Horowitz 1985   48  0.6038  0.0050  0.0549  0.056  0.5724  0.17
Indjic 2001   7  0.7020  0.0013  0.0913  0.479  0.526  0.49
Kapell 1951   40  0.6362  0.0040  0.0934  0.0949  0.0642  0.07
Kiepura 1999   43  0.6226  0.0048  0.0645  0.0639  0.0749  0.06
Kilenyi 1937   39  0.6322  0.0017  0.0816  0.4242  0.0726  0.17
Kissin 1993   3  0.754  0.042  0.443  0.7218  0.433  0.56
Kitain 1937   63  0.348  0.0161  0.0553  0.0514  0.4830  0.15
Kushner 1990   16  0.6821  0.0018  0.0810  0.5122  0.2314  0.34
Levy 1951   57  0.5715  0.0154  0.0457  0.0461  0.0463  0.04
Luisada 1990   47  0.6154  0.0046  0.0552  0.0546  0.0660  0.05
Lushtak 2004   21  0.6644  0.0019  0.1018  0.4138  0.0727  0.17
Lympany 1968   32  0.6446  0.0047  0.0742  0.0739  0.0841  0.07
Magaloff 1977   12  0.6942  0.0025  0.1022  0.3520  0.3613  0.35
Magaloff 1977b   13  0.6949  0.0026  0.1423  0.3423  0.3116  0.32
Magin 1975   45  0.6241  0.0044  0.0460  0.0463  0.0464  0.04
Milkina 1970   4  0.7310  0.018  0.174  0.6417  0.532  0.58
Mohovich 1999   46  0.6129  0.0034  0.0740  0.0735  0.0845  0.07
Nadelmann 1956   23  0.6613  0.0120  0.1026  0.3022  0.2221  0.26
Ohlsson 1999   33  0.6312  0.0133  0.0743  0.0734  0.0940  0.08
Olejniczac 1990   31  0.6465  0.0037  0.0936  0.0952  0.0644  0.07
Olejniczak 1991   37  0.6366  0.0045  0.0551  0.0556  0.0558  0.05
Osinska 1989   2  0.753  0.053  0.492  0.7832  0.1712  0.36
Paderewski 1912   18  0.6751  0.0015  0.0815  0.4312  0.419  0.42
Perahia 1994   55  0.5747  0.0056  0.0555  0.0524  0.3434  0.13
Perlemuter 1986   14  0.6811  0.019  0.147  0.5919  0.2910  0.41
Poblocka 1999   50  0.6055  0.0051  0.0461  0.0444  0.0756  0.05
Rangell 2001   52  0.5863  0.0052  0.0456  0.0441  0.0662  0.05
Risler 1920   56  0.5740  0.0053  0.0548  0.0548  0.0657  0.05
Rosen 1989   54  0.5728  0.0059  0.0554  0.0540  0.0754  0.06
Rubinstein 1939   38  0.635  0.0330  0.0731  0.1613  0.4420  0.27
Rubinstein 1952   22  0.6636  0.0032  0.0930  0.1738  0.0638  0.10
Rubinstein 1966   15  0.6825  0.0029  0.1027  0.2924  0.3118  0.30
Rummel 1943   62  0.4923  0.0060  0.0459  0.0449  0.0465  0.04
Shebanova 2002   10  0.6916  0.0111  0.1411  0.5035  0.0823  0.20
Smith 1975   11  0.692  0.064  0.195  0.629  0.484  0.55
Szpilman 1948   6  0.7124  0.007  0.156  0.6013  0.581  0.59
Uninsky 1971   41  0.6364  0.0035  0.0935  0.0943  0.0643  0.07
Wasowski 1980   49  0.6027  0.0043  0.0646  0.0644  0.0650  0.06
Weissenberg 1971   51  0.5932  0.0049  0.0741  0.0746  0.0652  0.06
Average   1  0.791  0.641  0.631  0.8652  0.0622  0.23
Random 1    66  0.0056  0.0065  0.0265  0.029  0.4139  0.09
Random 2   64  0.0961  0.0064  0.0364  0.0319  0.3537  0.10
Random 3   65  0.0058  0.0066  0.0166  0.017  0.4646  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).