Smith 1975

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   34  0.6139  0.0032  0.0932  0.1753  0.0641  0.10
Ax 1995   5  0.724  0.096  0.253  0.6935  0.1112  0.28
Bacha 1998   38  0.5949  0.0045  0.0742  0.0756  0.0551  0.06
Barbosa 1983   56  0.5144  0.0049  0.0839  0.0862  0.0454  0.06
BenOr 1989   43  0.5835  0.0025  0.0928  0.2242  0.0735  0.12
Biret 1990   36  0.6064  0.0037  0.0653  0.0637  0.0848  0.07
Brailowsky 1960   9  0.697  0.037  0.238  0.5613  0.534  0.54
Chiu 1999   55  0.5266  0.0058  0.0650  0.0642  0.0649  0.06
Clidat 1994   44  0.5760  0.0048  0.0935  0.0961  0.0545  0.07
Cohen 1997   59  0.4933  0.0061  0.0654  0.0629  0.1938  0.11
Cortot 1951   61  0.4238  0.0059  0.0463  0.0413  0.4434  0.13
Csalog 1996   7  0.7053  0.0015  0.0813  0.4611  0.436  0.44
Czerny 1989   40  0.5814  0.0139  0.0744  0.0744  0.0552  0.06
Ezaki 2006   11  0.6817  0.0111  0.1017  0.4233  0.1116  0.21
Falvay 1989   6  0.7110  0.025  0.345  0.6631  0.1411  0.30
Fiorentino 1962   4  0.732  0.182  0.271  0.7513  0.591  0.67
Fliere 1977   33  0.6127  0.0033  0.0837  0.0844  0.0743  0.07
Fou 1978   37  0.5941  0.0042  0.0561  0.0546  0.0750  0.06
Francois 1956   14  0.6726  0.009  0.1118  0.4211  0.505  0.46
Goldenweiser 1946   53  0.5519  0.0036  0.0649  0.063  0.6818  0.20
Gornostaeva 1994   60  0.4550  0.0056  0.0558  0.0544  0.0662  0.05
Groot 1988   19  0.6620  0.0021  0.1119  0.4149  0.0626  0.16
Hatto 1993   16  0.6740  0.0016  0.1014  0.4549  0.0627  0.16
Hatto 1997   20  0.6645  0.0018  0.0922  0.3539  0.0723  0.16
Horszowski 1983   58  0.4943  0.0060  0.0560  0.0536  0.0658  0.05
Indjic 2001   17  0.6725  0.0017  0.1616  0.4254  0.0625  0.16
Katin 1996   21  0.6612  0.0124  0.1420  0.3833  0.1217  0.21
Kiepura 1999   52  0.5537  0.0040  0.0746  0.0730  0.1736  0.11
Korecka 1992   54  0.5463  0.0051  0.0745  0.0726  0.3229  0.15
Kushner 1990   48  0.5746  0.0047  0.0836  0.0839  0.0842  0.08
Lilamand 2001   30  0.6230  0.0041  0.0559  0.054  0.5022  0.16
Luisada 1990   32  0.6152  0.0029  0.0830  0.2024  0.3113  0.25
Luisada 2008   41  0.5821  0.0043  0.0652  0.0628  0.2137  0.11
Lushtak 2004   24  0.6447  0.0020  0.1023  0.3546  0.0724  0.16
Malcuzynski 1951   15  0.675  0.048  0.197  0.5649  0.0620  0.18
Malcuzynski 1961   27  0.6316  0.0110  0.1112  0.4748  0.0530  0.15
Magaloff 1977   47  0.5731  0.0046  0.0743  0.0732  0.1540  0.10
Magin 1975   25  0.6424  0.0030  0.0729  0.2032  0.1228  0.15
Meguri 1997   49  0.5742  0.0054  0.0840  0.0847  0.0553  0.06
Milkina 1970   10  0.6822  0.0014  0.0910  0.5137  0.1014  0.23
Mohovich 1999   29  0.6334  0.0027  0.1026  0.2635  0.0832  0.14
Nezu 2005   42  0.5818  0.0044  0.0838  0.0846  0.0746  0.07
Ohlsson 1999   1  0.761  0.331  0.336  0.6311  0.512  0.57
Olejniczak 1990   39  0.5956  0.0038  0.0648  0.0652  0.0657  0.06
Osinska 1989   23  0.6411  0.0219  0.0915  0.4451  0.0719  0.18
Perlemuter 1992   46  0.5757  0.0052  0.0557  0.054  0.3931  0.14
Poblocka 1999   26  0.6428  0.0031  0.0731  0.1750  0.0639  0.10
Rangell 2001   51  0.5629  0.0055  0.0741  0.0756  0.0556  0.06
Richter 1960   62  0.4154  0.0063  0.0655  0.0655  0.0560  0.05
Richter 1961   63  0.4059  0.0062  0.0462  0.0448  0.0563  0.04
Rosen 1989   13  0.6715  0.0123  0.1121  0.3722  0.3010  0.33
Rubinstein 1939   28  0.639  0.0226  0.0925  0.3236  0.0821  0.16
Rubinstein 1952   18  0.663  0.1012  0.1011  0.5126  0.288  0.38
Rubinstein 1966   22  0.6523  0.0028  0.0827  0.2440  0.0733  0.13
Rudanovskaya 2007   50  0.5732  0.0053  0.0651  0.0654  0.0561  0.05
Shebanova 2002   45  0.5751  0.0050  0.0647  0.0647  0.0655  0.06
Smith 1975   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Sztompka 1959   12  0.6736  0.0022  0.1024  0.348  0.557  0.43
Tanyel 1992   8  0.6913  0.0113  0.109  0.5231  0.229  0.34
Tsujii 2005   3  0.736  0.034  0.192  0.7039  0.0715  0.22
Uninsky 1959   2  0.748  0.023  0.164  0.6813  0.443  0.55
Vardi 1988   35  0.6058  0.0034  0.0933  0.0946  0.0644  0.07
Wasowski 1980   57  0.5048  0.0057  0.0556  0.0560  0.0559  0.05
Zimerman 1975   31  0.6265  0.0035  0.0934  0.0944  0.0647  0.07
Random 1   66  -0.0861  0.0066  0.0166  0.0158  0.0366  0.02
Random 2   65  -0.0655  0.0064  0.0264  0.0249  0.0564  0.03
Random 3   64  -0.0662  0.0065  0.0265  0.0245  0.0465  0.03

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).