Random 2

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   33  -0.0233  0.0023  0.0523  0.1864  0.0321  0.07
Ax 1995   29  -0.0234  0.0047  0.0545  0.0564  0.0250  0.03
Bacha 1998   30  -0.0249  0.0042  0.0633  0.0664  0.0333  0.04
Barbosa 1983   6  0.0121  0.0016  0.0817  0.2665  0.0218  0.07
BenOr 1989   39  -0.0355  0.0044  0.0547  0.0565  0.0251  0.03
Biret 1990   64  -0.1062  0.0062  0.0263  0.0266  0.0165  0.01
Brailowsky 1960   54  -0.0546  0.0058  0.0459  0.0465  0.0237  0.03
Chiu 1999   4  0.028  0.037  0.233  0.5764  0.033  0.13
Clidat 1994   31  -0.0231  0.0022  0.0525  0.1564  0.0320  0.07
Cohen 1997   1  0.081  0.271  0.262  0.6064  0.035  0.13
Cortot 1951   26  -0.0128  0.0038  0.0539  0.0565  0.0253  0.03
Csalog 1996   25  -0.0139  0.0019  0.0719  0.2364  0.0219  0.07
Czerny 1989   20  0.0030  0.0041  0.0536  0.0565  0.0240  0.03
Ezaki 2006   15  0.0042  0.0029  0.0629  0.1364  0.0323  0.06
Falvay 1989   53  -0.0564  0.0056  0.0540  0.0565  0.0238  0.03
Fiorentino 1962   62  -0.0737  0.0063  0.0261  0.0266  0.0164  0.01
Fliere 1977   40  -0.0350  0.0043  0.0550  0.0564  0.0236  0.03
Fou 1978   35  -0.0225  0.0030  0.0531  0.1265  0.0227  0.05
Francois 1956   8  0.017  0.038  0.1510  0.3864  0.0213  0.09
Goldenweiser 1946   65  -0.1032  0.0061  0.0262  0.0266  0.0163  0.01
Gornostaeva 1994   63  -0.0847  0.0060  0.0360  0.0366  0.0162  0.02
Groot 1988   66  -0.1054  0.0066  0.0166  0.0166  0.0166  0.01
Hatto 1993   57  -0.0561  0.0050  0.0454  0.0464  0.0252  0.03
Hatto 1997   48  -0.0453  0.0045  0.0552  0.0564  0.0244  0.03
Horszowski 1983   27  -0.0115  0.0115  0.1116  0.2765  0.0216  0.07
Indjic 2001   52  -0.0463  0.0049  0.0537  0.0564  0.0248  0.03
Katin 1996   49  -0.0451  0.0046  0.0457  0.0466  0.0160  0.02
Kiepura 1999   58  -0.0657  0.0064  0.0265  0.0265  0.0256  0.02
Korecka 1992   14  0.0023  0.0028  0.0628  0.1464  0.0228  0.05
Kushner 1990   55  -0.0556  0.0057  0.0456  0.0466  0.0161  0.02
Lilamand 2001   9  0.014  0.076  0.177  0.4964  0.037  0.12
Luisada 1990   50  -0.0436  0.0037  0.0551  0.0564  0.0245  0.03
Luisada 2008   37  -0.0211  0.0113  0.1211  0.3663  0.0310  0.10
Lushtak 2004   18  0.0043  0.0024  0.0524  0.1664  0.0225  0.06
Malcuzynski 1951   42  -0.0340  0.0035  0.0544  0.0564  0.0254  0.03
Malcuzynski 1961   24  -0.0165  0.0032  0.0532  0.1064  0.0329  0.05
Magaloff 1977   46  -0.0318  0.0127  0.0627  0.1464  0.0231  0.05
Magin 1975   59  -0.0658  0.0065  0.0264  0.0264  0.0259  0.02
Meguri 1997   28  -0.0222  0.0020  0.0722  0.1864  0.0224  0.06
Milkina 1970   16  0.0024  0.0040  0.0535  0.0565  0.0241  0.03
Mohovich 1999   13  0.0059  0.0011  0.1114  0.3264  0.0215  0.08
Nezu 2005   11  0.0044  0.0018  0.1112  0.3464  0.0311  0.10
Ohlsson 1999   12  0.002  0.203  0.205  0.5364  0.034  0.13
Olejniczak 1990   61  -0.0745  0.0059  0.0458  0.0464  0.0255  0.03
Osinska 1989   41  -0.0335  0.0055  0.0546  0.0566  0.0157  0.02
Perlemuter 1992   7  0.015  0.075  0.188  0.4764  0.036  0.12
Poblocka 1999   22  -0.0114  0.0110  0.1113  0.3365  0.0214  0.08
Rangell 2001   3  0.036  0.044  0.171  0.6163  0.042  0.16
Richter 1960   5  0.019  0.039  0.126  0.4963  0.038  0.12
Richter 1961   32  -0.0226  0.0014  0.1115  0.2964  0.0312  0.09
Rosen 1989   34  -0.0229  0.0036  0.0541  0.0564  0.0247  0.03
Rubinstein 1939   45  -0.0338  0.0053  0.0542  0.0566  0.0158  0.02
Rubinstein 1952   10  0.0010  0.0217  0.0818  0.2664  0.0222  0.07
Rubinstein 1966   21  -0.0116  0.0131  0.0630  0.1364  0.0230  0.05
Rudanovskaya 2007   43  -0.0312  0.0125  0.0726  0.1564  0.0232  0.05
Shebanova 2002   19  0.0013  0.0112  0.119  0.4164  0.039  0.11
Smith 1975   60  -0.0617  0.0134  0.0549  0.0564  0.0239  0.03
Sztompka 1959   36  -0.0241  0.0052  0.0453  0.0464  0.0243  0.03
Tanyel 1992   38  -0.0360  0.0051  0.0534  0.0565  0.0246  0.03
Tsujii 2005   23  -0.0166  0.0026  0.0621  0.1864  0.0226  0.06
Uninsky 1959   17  0.0020  0.0021  0.0720  0.2364  0.0217  0.07
Vardi 1988   44  -0.0352  0.0048  0.0455  0.0465  0.0242  0.03
Wasowski 1980   51  -0.0427  0.0033  0.0543  0.0565  0.0235  0.03
Zimerman 1975   47  -0.0348  0.0054  0.0548  0.0565  0.0249  0.03
Random 1   2  0.063  0.122  0.214  0.561  0.671  0.61
Random 2   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Random 3   56  -0.0519  0.0039  0.0538  0.0546  0.0434  0.04

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).