Random 2

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   3  0.0926  0.0020  0.1119  0.3564  0.0323  0.10
Ashkenazy 1981   42  0.0260  0.0041  0.0636  0.0664  0.0348  0.04
Beliavsky 2004   63  -0.0328  0.0054  0.0356  0.0364  0.0353  0.03
BenOr 1989   49  0.0036  0.0056  0.0357  0.0364  0.0357  0.03
Biret 1990   55  0.0053  0.0065  0.0263  0.0264  0.0264  0.02
Blet 2003   12  0.0613  0.0122  0.1021  0.3164  0.0419  0.11
Block 1995   31  0.0311  0.0127  0.0728  0.1864  0.0331  0.07
Brailowsky 1960   61  -0.0240  0.0066  0.0166  0.0165  0.0266  0.01
Chiu 1999   29  0.038  0.0213  0.1014  0.4064  0.0316  0.11
Clidat 1994   59  -0.0154  0.0055  0.0355  0.0364  0.0356  0.03
Cohen 1997   1  0.131  0.441  0.431  0.6762  0.042  0.16
Coop 1987   36  0.0251  0.0032  0.0532  0.1064  0.0334  0.05
Cortot 1951   52  0.0016  0.0153  0.0452  0.0465  0.0258  0.03
Czerny 1949   60  -0.0163  0.0047  0.0545  0.0564  0.0343  0.04
Czerny 1949b   50  0.0042  0.0031  0.0531  0.1064  0.0333  0.05
Ezaki 2006   54  0.0066  0.0057  0.0454  0.0464  0.0350  0.03
Falvay 1989   32  0.0337  0.0043  0.0733  0.0764  0.0332  0.05
Ferenczy 1958   47  0.0150  0.0058  0.0358  0.0364  0.0354  0.03
Fiorentino 1962   13  0.0623  0.0010  0.126  0.4764  0.0314  0.12
Fliere 1977   56  0.0055  0.0048  0.0640  0.0664  0.0336  0.04
Fou 1978   58  -0.0165  0.0059  0.0262  0.0264  0.0261  0.02
Francois 1956   62  -0.0261  0.0060  0.0260  0.0264  0.0365  0.02
Hatto 1997   19  0.0559  0.0018  0.0817  0.3763  0.0321  0.11
Horowitz 1971   30  0.0330  0.0049  0.0541  0.0564  0.0349  0.04
Horowitz 1985   4  0.0817  0.006  0.1318  0.3662  0.0411  0.12
Indjic 2001   15  0.0643  0.0012  0.109  0.4562  0.049  0.13
Kapell 1951   53  0.0039  0.0051  0.0548  0.0564  0.0338  0.04
Kiepura 1999   28  0.035  0.048  0.147  0.4764  0.0310  0.12
Kilenyi 1937   35  0.0334  0.0039  0.0635  0.0664  0.0342  0.04
Kissin 1993   18  0.0556  0.0023  0.0724  0.2363  0.0327  0.08
Kitain 1937   11  0.063  0.083  0.212  0.6162  0.043  0.16
Kushner 1990   10  0.0720  0.0011  0.1112  0.4163  0.0318  0.11
Levy 1951   57  0.0046  0.0062  0.0261  0.0264  0.0260  0.02
Luisada 1990   25  0.0414  0.0125  0.0726  0.2163  0.0426  0.09
Lushtak 2004   43  0.0218  0.0042  0.0637  0.0663  0.0344  0.04
Lympany 1968   33  0.0344  0.0044  0.0542  0.0563  0.0335  0.04
Magaloff 1977   46  0.0149  0.0045  0.0546  0.0565  0.0255  0.03
Magaloff 1977b   40  0.0252  0.0040  0.0639  0.0664  0.0347  0.04
Magin 1975   21  0.0445  0.0029  0.0825  0.2164  0.0425  0.09
Milkina 1970   26  0.0447  0.0037  0.0634  0.0664  0.0339  0.04
Mohovich 1999   5  0.082  0.202  0.263  0.5463  0.044  0.15
Nadelmann 1956   14  0.0610  0.0115  0.0713  0.4163  0.048  0.13
Ohlsson 1999   7  0.077  0.024  0.1611  0.4362  0.047  0.13
Olejniczac 1990   8  0.0724  0.009  0.165  0.5164  0.0313  0.12
Olejniczak 1991   17  0.0633  0.0016  0.0810  0.4463  0.0317  0.11
Osinska 1989   41  0.0231  0.0046  0.0543  0.0564  0.0337  0.04
Paderewski 1912   34  0.0329  0.0026  0.0827  0.2064  0.0328  0.08
Perahia 1994   38  0.0227  0.0036  0.0551  0.0563  0.0345  0.04
Perlemuter 1986   51  0.0032  0.0033  0.0544  0.0564  0.0340  0.04
Poblocka 1999   64  -0.0364  0.0064  0.0264  0.0265  0.0259  0.02
Rangell 2001   16  0.0619  0.0014  0.0716  0.3764  0.0415  0.12
Risler 1920   45  0.0235  0.0028  0.0730  0.1565  0.0329  0.07
Rosen 1989   24  0.0412  0.0135  0.0547  0.0564  0.0346  0.04
Rubinstein 1939   39  0.0257  0.0050  0.0549  0.0565  0.0252  0.03
Rubinstein 1952   6  0.089  0.027  0.184  0.5362  0.045  0.15
Rubinstein 1966   9  0.0748  0.0017  0.0822  0.2861  0.0420  0.11
Rummel 1943   65  -0.0438  0.0061  0.0259  0.0264  0.0263  0.02
Shebanova 2002   22  0.0441  0.0030  0.0829  0.1664  0.0330  0.07
Smith 1975   48  0.0121  0.0052  0.0453  0.0464  0.0351  0.03
Szpilman 1948   20  0.0425  0.0021  0.0920  0.3264  0.0322  0.10
Uninsky 1971   66  -0.0458  0.0063  0.0265  0.0264  0.0262  0.02
Wasowski 1980   37  0.0215  0.0124  0.0723  0.2564  0.0324  0.09
Weissenberg 1971   23  0.0422  0.0019  0.0915  0.3961  0.0412  0.12
Average   27  0.0362  0.0038  0.0638  0.0664  0.0341  0.04
Random 1    44  0.026  0.0434  0.0550  0.0511  0.406  0.14
Random 2   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Random 3   2  0.104  0.045  0.148  0.461  0.751  0.59

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).