Horowitz 1971

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   19  0.665  0.024  0.1313  0.4529  0.269  0.34
Ashkenazy 1981   34  0.6335  0.0040  0.0647  0.0653  0.0649  0.06
Beliavsky 2004   58  0.5739  0.0033  0.0933  0.0937  0.0737  0.08
BenOr 1989   13  0.6631  0.0019  0.0919  0.3956  0.0530  0.14
Biret 1990   3  0.7111  0.017  0.114  0.589  0.502  0.54
Blet 2003   32  0.6336  0.0032  0.0832  0.1663  0.0438  0.08
Block 1995   42  0.6122  0.0044  0.0459  0.0459  0.0464  0.04
Brailowsky 1960   29  0.6420  0.0045  0.0460  0.0421  0.3935  0.12
Chiu 1999   54  0.5940  0.0049  0.0646  0.0640  0.0739  0.06
Clidat 1994   4  0.7042  0.009  0.138  0.5241  0.0618  0.18
Cohen 1997   62  0.4859  0.0063  0.0645  0.0622  0.3726  0.15
Coop 1987   41  0.6252  0.0041  0.0737  0.0746  0.0644  0.06
Cortot 1951   56  0.5830  0.0062  0.0554  0.0521  0.3233  0.13
Czerny 1949   31  0.6333  0.0021  0.0916  0.4244  0.0622  0.16
Czerny 1949b   26  0.6534  0.0015  0.1010  0.4845  0.0619  0.17
Ezaki 2006   22  0.6529  0.0029  0.1028  0.2750  0.0631  0.13
Falvay 1989   57  0.5855  0.0059  0.0643  0.0654  0.0640  0.06
Ferenczy 1958   59  0.5628  0.0057  0.0463  0.0441  0.0757  0.05
Fiorentino 1962   46  0.6150  0.0054  0.0551  0.0556  0.0560  0.05
Fliere 1977   23  0.6537  0.0028  0.1227  0.2851  0.0727  0.14
Fou 1978   43  0.6145  0.0043  0.0557  0.0543  0.0842  0.06
Francois 1956   52  0.6053  0.0042  0.0555  0.0536  0.0661  0.05
Hatto 1997   53  0.5966  0.0035  0.0640  0.0656  0.0556  0.05
Horowitz 1971   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Horowitz 1985   2  0.752  0.162  0.442  0.811  0.901  0.85
Indjic 2001   55  0.5932  0.0036  0.0549  0.0556  0.0659  0.05
Kapell 1951   48  0.6062  0.0050  0.0641  0.0646  0.0643  0.06
Kiepura 1999   21  0.6625  0.0030  0.1130  0.2136  0.0734  0.12
Kilenyi 1937   33  0.6310  0.0126  0.1125  0.3459  0.0532  0.13
Kissin 1993   8  0.6821  0.0010  0.106  0.5638  0.0914  0.22
Kitain 1937   63  0.4717  0.0039  0.0644  0.062  0.6616  0.20
Kushner 1990   10  0.6765  0.0013  0.0812  0.4637  0.0717  0.18
Levy 1951   60  0.5649  0.0060  0.0550  0.0543  0.0653  0.05
Luisada 1990   11  0.6719  0.0027  0.0929  0.2353  0.0636  0.12
Lushtak 2004   15  0.6656  0.0014  0.0914  0.4457  0.0525  0.15
Lympany 1968   9  0.687  0.0112  0.119  0.5122  0.364  0.43
Magaloff 1977   27  0.6457  0.0048  0.0558  0.0538  0.0746  0.06
Magaloff 1977b   38  0.6261  0.0055  0.0553  0.0538  0.0848  0.06
Magin 1975   37  0.6238  0.0051  0.0642  0.0653  0.0554  0.05
Milkina 1970   18  0.6616  0.0011  0.1111  0.4826  0.248  0.34
Mohovich 1999   20  0.6626  0.0023  0.0923  0.3638  0.0820  0.17
Nadelmann 1956   7  0.693  0.038  0.133  0.6219  0.246  0.39
Ohlsson 1999   36  0.6323  0.0034  0.0735  0.0748  0.0645  0.06
Olejniczac 1990   40  0.6247  0.0053  0.0834  0.0857  0.0547  0.06
Olejniczak 1991   39  0.6246  0.0052  0.0638  0.0646  0.0741  0.06
Osinska 1989   5  0.709  0.013  0.147  0.5445  0.0815  0.21
Paderewski 1912   30  0.6418  0.0025  0.0924  0.3424  0.2011  0.26
Perahia 1994   25  0.654  0.025  0.1221  0.388  0.573  0.47
Perlemuter 1986   45  0.6164  0.0047  0.0462  0.0458  0.0562  0.04
Poblocka 1999   6  0.696  0.016  0.135  0.5736  0.0913  0.23
Rangell 2001   49  0.6027  0.0038  0.0736  0.0740  0.0650  0.06
Risler 1920   61  0.5558  0.0061  0.0461  0.0449  0.0652  0.05
Rosen 1989   51  0.6048  0.0058  0.0556  0.0549  0.0658  0.05
Rubinstein 1939   35  0.6351  0.0037  0.0639  0.0623  0.3329  0.14
Rubinstein 1952   14  0.6614  0.0017  0.0915  0.4336  0.0623  0.16
Rubinstein 1966   16  0.6615  0.0022  0.0817  0.4219  0.385  0.40
Rummel 1943   44  0.6112  0.0031  0.0831  0.189  0.4110  0.27
Shebanova 2002   12  0.678  0.0120  0.0820  0.3945  0.0624  0.15
Smith 1975   17  0.6641  0.0024  0.1122  0.3850  0.0528  0.14
Szpilman 1948   47  0.6060  0.0056  0.0552  0.0546  0.0651  0.05
Uninsky 1971   28  0.6424  0.0016  0.0918  0.4144  0.0621  0.16
Wasowski 1980   24  0.6513  0.0018  0.0826  0.3117  0.377  0.34
Weissenberg 1971   50  0.6044  0.0046  0.0548  0.0549  0.0655  0.05
Average   1  0.781  0.661  0.651  0.9037  0.0712  0.25
Random 1    66  -0.0463  0.0065  0.0265  0.0248  0.0365  0.02
Random 2   64  0.0343  0.0064  0.0364  0.0341  0.0563  0.04
Random 3   65  -0.0454  0.0066  0.0166  0.0153  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).