Cohen 1997

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   5  0.5732  0.007  0.198  0.6062  0.0417  0.15
Ashkenazy 1981   6  0.556  0.048  0.135  0.6750  0.064  0.20
Beliavsky 2004   48  0.4118  0.0123  0.1023  0.3649  0.0614  0.15
BenOr 1989   28  0.4548  0.0041  0.0549  0.0553  0.0657  0.05
Biret 1990   17  0.5033  0.0029  0.0925  0.3062  0.0428  0.11
Blet 2003   10  0.548  0.0417  0.1316  0.4758  0.0420  0.14
Block 1995   26  0.4647  0.0039  0.0643  0.0660  0.0453  0.05
Brailowsky 1960   56  0.3853  0.0059  0.0363  0.0358  0.0558  0.04
Chiu 1999   35  0.4420  0.0137  0.0548  0.0560  0.0459  0.04
Clidat 1994   45  0.4261  0.0046  0.0640  0.0652  0.0551  0.05
Cohen 1997   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Coop 1987   27  0.4646  0.0026  0.0830  0.1963  0.0332  0.08
Cortot 1951   32  0.4523  0.0031  0.0931  0.1860  0.0433  0.08
Czerny 1949   62  0.3263  0.0054  0.0550  0.0551  0.0649  0.05
Czerny 1949b   58  0.3462  0.0053  0.0552  0.0550  0.0547  0.05
Ezaki 2006   44  0.4265  0.0051  0.0456  0.0454  0.0643  0.05
Falvay 1989   38  0.4441  0.0042  0.0544  0.0563  0.0461  0.04
Ferenczy 1958   46  0.4154  0.0061  0.0461  0.0450  0.0564  0.04
Fiorentino 1962   53  0.4058  0.0056  0.0546  0.0555  0.0656  0.05
Fliere 1977   29  0.4549  0.0038  0.0736  0.0757  0.0636  0.06
Fou 1978   30  0.4544  0.0036  0.0641  0.0654  0.0638  0.06
Francois 1956   33  0.445  0.0610  0.1218  0.4352  0.0422  0.13
Hatto 1997   2  0.6117  0.012  0.253  0.7230  0.161  0.34
Horowitz 1971   21  0.4837  0.0024  0.1222  0.3745  0.0618  0.15
Horowitz 1985   59  0.3459  0.0057  0.0551  0.0543  0.0544  0.05
Indjic 2001   1  0.611  0.291  0.292  0.7329  0.162  0.34
Kapell 1951   34  0.4427  0.0043  0.0639  0.0650  0.0639  0.06
Kiepura 1999   36  0.4434  0.0033  0.0735  0.0752  0.0535  0.06
Kilenyi 1937   54  0.3939  0.0049  0.0455  0.0454  0.0648  0.05
Kissin 1993   12  0.5338  0.0016  0.1614  0.5260  0.0419  0.14
Kitain 1937   63  0.2326  0.0047  0.0553  0.0549  0.0555  0.05
Kushner 1990   9  0.5416  0.0111  0.1210  0.5760  0.0415  0.15
Levy 1951   57  0.3730  0.0062  0.0457  0.0447  0.0560  0.04
Luisada 1990   47  0.4145  0.0052  0.0458  0.0454  0.0652  0.05
Lushtak 2004   18  0.4929  0.0025  0.1319  0.4349  0.0612  0.16
Lympany 1968   15  0.5031  0.0021  0.1117  0.4762  0.0323  0.12
Magaloff 1977   19  0.4851  0.0034  0.0834  0.0861  0.0440  0.06
Magaloff 1977b   20  0.4842  0.0035  0.1033  0.1062  0.0442  0.06
Magin 1975   39  0.4311  0.0340  0.0545  0.0561  0.0462  0.04
Milkina 1970   3  0.577  0.044  0.214  0.6953  0.056  0.19
Mohovich 1999   52  0.4012  0.0320  0.0927  0.2464  0.0429  0.10
Nadelmann 1956   24  0.4740  0.0022  0.0921  0.3861  0.0424  0.12
Ohlsson 1999   14  0.5213  0.0218  0.1020  0.4360  0.0421  0.13
Olejniczac 1990   49  0.4160  0.0055  0.0737  0.0761  0.0450  0.05
Olejniczak 1991   37  0.4466  0.0048  0.0460  0.0464  0.0365  0.03
Osinska 1989   11  0.539  0.0315  0.159  0.5753  0.068  0.18
Paderewski 1912   43  0.4222  0.0030  0.0828  0.2345  0.0625  0.12
Perahia 1994   50  0.4110  0.0319  0.0924  0.3046  0.0526  0.12
Perlemuter 1986   22  0.482  0.115  0.246  0.6453  0.059  0.18
Poblocka 1999   41  0.4343  0.0050  0.0454  0.0449  0.0645  0.05
Rangell 2001   23  0.4819  0.0128  0.0726  0.2563  0.0430  0.10
Risler 1920   60  0.3428  0.0063  0.0547  0.0556  0.0546  0.05
Rosen 1989   51  0.4025  0.0058  0.0459  0.0451  0.0654  0.05
Rubinstein 1939   16  0.503  0.093  0.1715  0.4935  0.075  0.19
Rubinstein 1952   13  0.5315  0.0112  0.127  0.6255  0.0413  0.16
Rubinstein 1966   7  0.5535  0.0013  0.1313  0.5434  0.077  0.19
Rummel 1943   61  0.3364  0.0044  0.0642  0.0640  0.0641  0.06
Shebanova 2002   8  0.5414  0.019  0.1111  0.5561  0.0510  0.17
Smith 1975   42  0.4236  0.0045  0.0638  0.0640  0.0637  0.06
Szpilman 1948   40  0.4321  0.0032  0.0932  0.1756  0.0531  0.09
Uninsky 1971   25  0.4724  0.0014  0.1412  0.5463  0.0416  0.15
Wasowski 1980   31  0.4557  0.0027  0.0729  0.1945  0.0627  0.11
Weissenberg 1971   55  0.3952  0.0060  0.0364  0.0353  0.0563  0.04
Average   4  0.574  0.076  0.251  0.7555  0.063  0.21
Random 1    65  -0.0155  0.0065  0.0265  0.0218  0.2634  0.07
Random 2   64  0.1350  0.0064  0.0462  0.041  0.6711  0.16
Random 3   66  -0.0256  0.0066  0.0166  0.0146  0.0466  0.02

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).