Nezu 2005

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   7  0.8237  0.008  0.1111  0.4517  0.3616  0.40
Ax 1995   22  0.7755  0.0028  0.1017  0.3517  0.3920  0.37
Bacha 1998   13  0.8040  0.0022  0.0824  0.263  0.5318  0.37
Barbosa 1983   21  0.7820  0.0124  0.0826  0.259  0.4921  0.35
BenOr 1989   19  0.7822  0.0123  0.0829  0.204  0.5327  0.33
Biret 1990   17  0.8031  0.0027  0.0822  0.299  0.5217  0.39
Brailowsky 1960   47  0.6662  0.0052  0.0649  0.0635  0.0852  0.07
Chiu 1999   37  0.6942  0.0049  0.0552  0.0521  0.3341  0.13
Clidat 1994   28  0.757  0.0316  0.0821  0.3019  0.3625  0.33
Cohen 1997   61  0.4765  0.0062  0.0462  0.0462  0.0364  0.03
Cortot 1951   57  0.5557  0.0063  0.0551  0.0524  0.2148  0.10
Csalog 1996   46  0.6646  0.0046  0.0553  0.0539  0.0660  0.05
Czerny 1989   50  0.6434  0.0035  0.0837  0.0814  0.3038  0.15
Ezaki 2006   9  0.8118  0.0113  0.1012  0.4413  0.4912  0.46
Falvay 1989   18  0.796  0.043  0.134  0.584  0.545  0.56
Fiorentino 1962   16  0.8061  0.0025  0.1018  0.3320  0.3722  0.35
Fliere 1977   23  0.7753  0.0032  0.0932  0.1722  0.2733  0.21
Fou 1978   3  0.8529  0.0012  0.139  0.535  0.548  0.53
Francois 1956   51  0.6421  0.0151  0.0647  0.0644  0.0756  0.06
Goldenweiser 1946   63  0.4054  0.0061  0.0461  0.0432  0.1550  0.08
Gornostaeva 1994   42  0.6751  0.0048  0.0648  0.0619  0.3940  0.15
Groot 1988   44  0.6758  0.0039  0.0741  0.0715  0.2042  0.12
Hatto 1993   15  0.8012  0.0211  0.188  0.5312  0.549  0.53
Hatto 1997   14  0.809  0.0210  0.116  0.5411  0.556  0.54
Horszowski 1983   58  0.5443  0.0050  0.0558  0.0516  0.2544  0.11
Indjic 2001   12  0.8010  0.029  0.097  0.5412  0.557  0.54
Katin 1996   33  0.7241  0.0041  0.0933  0.0923  0.3037  0.16
Kiepura 1999   40  0.6848  0.0054  0.0650  0.0626  0.2243  0.11
Korecka 1992   55  0.6056  0.0060  0.0554  0.0530  0.1251  0.08
Kushner 1990   38  0.6938  0.0044  0.0555  0.0522  0.2645  0.11
Lilamand 2001   54  0.6339  0.0055  0.0744  0.0733  0.0655  0.06
Luisada 1990   39  0.6915  0.0134  0.0743  0.0713  0.4036  0.17
Luisada 2008   24  0.774  0.0715  0.0827  0.2111  0.5423  0.34
Lushtak 2004   11  0.8136  0.0021  0.0719  0.3211  0.5314  0.41
Malcuzynski 1951   2  0.872  0.182  0.243  0.682  0.662  0.67
Malcuzynski 1961   4  0.8414  0.015  0.115  0.562  0.634  0.59
Magaloff 1977   30  0.7428  0.0037  0.0839  0.0813  0.4634  0.19
Magin 1975   25  0.768  0.0218  0.0730  0.2011  0.4728  0.31
Meguri 1997   49  0.6519  0.0133  0.0742  0.0725  0.1547  0.10
Milkina 1970   32  0.7316  0.0131  0.0928  0.2126  0.3331  0.26
Mohovich 1999   41  0.6835  0.0029  0.1220  0.3119  0.3526  0.33
Nezu 2005   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Ohlsson 1999   43  0.6732  0.0045  0.0460  0.0439  0.0759  0.05
Olejniczak 1990   20  0.783  0.094  0.1216  0.366  0.5013  0.42
Osinska 1989   5  0.845  0.056  0.142  0.705  0.533  0.61
Perlemuter 1992   62  0.4560  0.0059  0.0463  0.0441  0.0561  0.04
Poblocka 1999   1  0.871  0.261  0.251  0.702  0.691  0.69
Rangell 2001   8  0.8250  0.0020  0.0814  0.4312  0.5211  0.47
Richter 1960   53  0.6359  0.0036  0.0936  0.0917  0.3535  0.18
Richter 1961   48  0.6630  0.0030  0.0831  0.1914  0.4030  0.28
Rosen 1989   52  0.6433  0.0053  0.0646  0.0627  0.2246  0.11
Rubinstein 1939   36  0.7044  0.0042  0.0838  0.0846  0.0653  0.07
Rubinstein 1952   35  0.7049  0.0047  0.0645  0.0636  0.0854  0.07
Rubinstein 1966   31  0.7352  0.0040  0.0740  0.0726  0.3239  0.15
Rudanovskaya 2007   60  0.5445  0.0056  0.0559  0.0556  0.0462  0.04
Shebanova 2002   34  0.7111  0.0214  0.0915  0.3719  0.3124  0.34
Smith 1975   56  0.5825  0.0057  0.0556  0.0541  0.0557  0.05
Sztompka 1959   59  0.5447  0.0058  0.0557  0.0533  0.0658  0.05
Tanyel 1992   29  0.7523  0.0119  0.1025  0.2516  0.3729  0.30
Tsujii 2005   10  0.8117  0.017  0.1010  0.5121  0.3215  0.40
Uninsky 1959   45  0.6626  0.0043  0.0934  0.0933  0.0949  0.09
Vardi 1988   26  0.7613  0.0226  0.0823  0.289  0.4819  0.37
Wasowski 1980   27  0.7624  0.0038  0.0935  0.096  0.5932  0.23
Zimerman 1975   6  0.8227  0.0017  0.0813  0.444  0.5710  0.50
Random 1   65  -0.1164  0.0065  0.0265  0.0257  0.0365  0.02
Random 2   64  -0.0566  0.0064  0.0264  0.0243  0.0563  0.03
Random 3   66  -0.2163  0.0066  0.0166  0.0146  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).