Lushtak 2004

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   45  0.6653  0.0033  0.0738  0.0718  0.4134  0.17
Ashkenazy 1981   23  0.7251  0.0022  0.1118  0.4019  0.3024  0.35
Beliavsky 2004   26  0.7010  0.0113  0.1321  0.393  0.6310  0.50
BenOr 1989   14  0.7513  0.0015  0.1212  0.5423  0.2720  0.38
Biret 1990   49  0.6548  0.0044  0.0552  0.0519  0.4044  0.14
Blet 2003   51  0.6527  0.0051  0.0645  0.0630  0.1154  0.08
Block 1995   24  0.7131  0.0034  0.0934  0.0918  0.4732  0.21
Brailowsky 1960   60  0.5759  0.0061  0.0462  0.0437  0.0957  0.06
Chiu 1999   18  0.7323  0.0018  0.1016  0.4227  0.3619  0.39
Clidat 1994   4  0.782  0.063  0.374  0.722  0.701  0.71
Cohen 1997   62  0.4952  0.0063  0.0649  0.0619  0.4335  0.16
Coop 1987   3  0.803  0.034  0.433  0.7519  0.478  0.59
Cortot 1951   43  0.6714  0.0053  0.0461  0.042  0.8033  0.18
Czerny 1949   38  0.6940  0.0029  0.0928  0.2534  0.0842  0.14
Czerny 1949b   25  0.7147  0.0028  0.0727  0.2929  0.1531  0.21
Ezaki 2006   7  0.774  0.038  0.158  0.6325  0.3413  0.46
Falvay 1989   8  0.7636  0.0010  0.1511  0.5720  0.439  0.50
Ferenczy 1958   54  0.6343  0.0057  0.0643  0.0624  0.3241  0.14
Fiorentino 1962   33  0.6955  0.0043  0.0553  0.0536  0.1056  0.07
Fliere 1977   13  0.7535  0.0017  0.1213  0.5128  0.3018  0.39
Fou 1978   19  0.7332  0.0025  0.0923  0.3532  0.1529  0.23
Francois 1956   50  0.6563  0.0054  0.0460  0.0425  0.2151  0.09
Hatto 1997   36  0.6922  0.0026  0.0925  0.306  0.6115  0.43
Horowitz 1971   47  0.6660  0.0041  0.0557  0.0514  0.4438  0.15
Horowitz 1985   61  0.5442  0.0060  0.0364  0.0322  0.3548  0.10
Indjic 2001   39  0.6824  0.0032  0.1130  0.227  0.6022  0.36
Kapell 1951   15  0.7425  0.0023  0.1617  0.4130  0.2425  0.31
Kiepura 1999   17  0.7416  0.0019  0.0922  0.376  0.6011  0.47
Kilenyi 1937   40  0.6854  0.0040  0.0556  0.0535  0.0860  0.06
Kissin 1993   2  0.8211  0.012  0.432  0.806  0.592  0.69
Kitain 1937   63  0.4430  0.0062  0.0459  0.0413  0.5143  0.14
Kushner 1990   22  0.7226  0.0024  0.1314  0.4717  0.3516  0.41
Levy 1951   53  0.6333  0.0052  0.0644  0.0622  0.3836  0.15
Luisada 1990   42  0.6838  0.0050  0.0554  0.0557  0.0562  0.05
Lushtak 2004   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Lympany 1968   10  0.768  0.019  0.1410  0.586  0.627  0.60
Magaloff 1977   37  0.6928  0.0046  0.0835  0.0832  0.1447  0.11
Magaloff 1977b   31  0.7020  0.0042  0.0555  0.0525  0.2946  0.12
Magin 1975   12  0.7546  0.0021  0.1020  0.4030  0.3521  0.37
Milkina 1970   11  0.769  0.0111  0.199  0.637  0.655  0.64
Mohovich 1999   41  0.6815  0.0038  0.0741  0.0724  0.3237  0.15
Nadelmann 1956   44  0.6737  0.0039  0.0648  0.0638  0.0759  0.06
Ohlsson 1999   29  0.7041  0.0036  0.0739  0.0733  0.0953  0.08
Olejniczac 1990   35  0.6944  0.0045  0.0740  0.0734  0.1055  0.08
Olejniczak 1991   28  0.7065  0.0035  0.1133  0.1139  0.0849  0.09
Osinska 1989   6  0.7819  0.005  0.186  0.6831  0.1823  0.35
Paderewski 1912   48  0.6664  0.0047  0.0642  0.0627  0.1450  0.09
Perahia 1994   52  0.636  0.0212  0.1326  0.303  0.7312  0.47
Perlemuter 1986   27  0.7018  0.0016  0.1119  0.4014  0.4217  0.41
Poblocka 1999   21  0.7217  0.0031  0.1031  0.2226  0.2330  0.22
Rangell 2001   16  0.7421  0.0020  0.1015  0.4317  0.4814  0.45
Risler 1920   57  0.6162  0.0056  0.0651  0.0653  0.0658  0.06
Rosen 1989   55  0.6356  0.0058  0.0558  0.0543  0.0761  0.06
Rubinstein 1939   58  0.5945  0.0049  0.0647  0.0624  0.3139  0.14
Rubinstein 1952   34  0.6929  0.0037  0.0836  0.0830  0.2045  0.13
Rubinstein 1966   46  0.6650  0.0048  0.0837  0.0828  0.2640  0.14
Rummel 1943   59  0.5849  0.0059  0.0646  0.0644  0.0563  0.05
Shebanova 2002   5  0.7812  0.016  0.215  0.7013  0.536  0.61
Smith 1975   30  0.7034  0.0030  0.0829  0.2420  0.2828  0.26
Szpilman 1948   56  0.6261  0.0055  0.0650  0.0634  0.1052  0.08
Uninsky 1971   9  0.767  0.027  0.257  0.642  0.733  0.68
Wasowski 1980   32  0.695  0.0314  0.1132  0.1811  0.4826  0.29
Weissenberg 1971   20  0.7339  0.0027  0.0824  0.3025  0.2927  0.29
Average   1  0.861  0.731  0.721  0.9114  0.484  0.66
Random 1    65  -0.0466  0.0065  0.0365  0.0345  0.0465  0.03
Random 2   64  0.0257  0.0064  0.0363  0.0337  0.0664  0.04
Random 3   66  -0.1058  0.0066  0.0166  0.0164  0.0266  0.01

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).