Osinska 1989

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   7  0.858  0.036  0.143  0.576  0.549  0.55
Ax 1995   4  0.865  0.079  0.1010  0.514  0.5215  0.51
Bacha 1998   38  0.7161  0.0042  0.0736  0.077  0.4833  0.18
Barbosa 1983   50  0.6721  0.0137  0.0642  0.0629  0.1646  0.10
BenOr 1989   55  0.6215  0.0135  0.0933  0.0915  0.3534  0.18
Biret 1990   22  0.8135  0.0026  0.0826  0.308  0.5622  0.41
Brailowsky 1960   32  0.7556  0.0030  0.0730  0.202  0.5426  0.33
Chiu 1999   57  0.5955  0.0061  0.0554  0.0556  0.0463  0.04
Clidat 1994   13  0.8332  0.0022  0.1822  0.3716  0.4025  0.38
Cohen 1997   59  0.5959  0.0059  0.0455  0.0418  0.3742  0.12
Cortot 1951   63  0.4848  0.0062  0.0457  0.0411  0.4440  0.13
Csalog 1996   24  0.7836  0.0031  0.0931  0.189  0.3930  0.26
Czerny 1989   31  0.759  0.0329  0.0829  0.2211  0.3429  0.27
Ezaki 2006   2  0.8727  0.0010  0.1311  0.503  0.643  0.57
Falvay 1989   15  0.831  0.231  0.221  0.683  0.581  0.63
Fiorentino 1962   21  0.8210  0.0223  0.2117  0.4412  0.5017  0.47
Fliere 1977   12  0.8343  0.0017  0.1223  0.358  0.5221  0.43
Fou 1978   34  0.7433  0.0041  0.0640  0.0633  0.0954  0.07
Francois 1956   60  0.5863  0.0060  0.0553  0.0548  0.0662  0.05
Goldenweiser 1946   61  0.5551  0.0063  0.0645  0.0635  0.0853  0.07
Gornostaeva 1994   58  0.5939  0.0050  0.0458  0.0429  0.1551  0.08
Groot 1988   47  0.6831  0.0039  0.0549  0.0514  0.2247  0.10
Hatto 1993   18  0.8226  0.0013  0.114  0.543  0.615  0.57
Hatto 1997   16  0.8322  0.0118  0.129  0.514  0.597  0.55
Horszowski 1983   52  0.6557  0.0045  0.0644  0.0613  0.2939  0.13
Indjic 2001   17  0.8330  0.0019  0.197  0.523  0.606  0.56
Katin 1996   27  0.7728  0.0032  0.0832  0.1528  0.2531  0.19
Kiepura 1999   54  0.6446  0.0049  0.0459  0.0416  0.2943  0.11
Korecka 1992   39  0.7162  0.0052  0.0362  0.0313  0.4044  0.11
Kushner 1990   48  0.6842  0.0038  0.0646  0.0612  0.3836  0.15
Lilamand 2001   42  0.7060  0.0054  0.0551  0.0540  0.0560  0.05
Luisada 1990   40  0.7037  0.0036  0.0641  0.0610  0.4635  0.17
Luisada 2008   45  0.6834  0.0040  0.0547  0.0516  0.4037  0.14
Lushtak 2004   25  0.783  0.092  0.1813  0.483  0.648  0.55
Malcuzynski 1951   1  0.887  0.035  0.198  0.516  0.5811  0.54
Malcuzynski 1961   6  0.856  0.064  0.1812  0.497  0.5612  0.52
Magaloff 1977   53  0.6458  0.0056  0.0552  0.0535  0.0758  0.06
Magin 1975   20  0.8225  0.0025  0.0924  0.3514  0.4324  0.39
Meguri 1997   62  0.5223  0.0134  0.0639  0.0626  0.1448  0.09
Milkina 1970   26  0.7714  0.0124  0.1325  0.3327  0.3127  0.32
Mohovich 1999   14  0.832  0.163  0.1514  0.485  0.5514  0.51
Nezu 2005   11  0.844  0.097  0.125  0.532  0.702  0.61
Ohlsson 1999   41  0.7040  0.0055  0.0548  0.0551  0.0559  0.05
Olejniczak 1990   19  0.8212  0.0214  0.1016  0.459  0.4618  0.45
Osinska 1989   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Perlemuter 1992   56  0.6144  0.0058  0.0361  0.0354  0.0464  0.03
Poblocka 1999   8  0.8519  0.0115  0.136  0.525  0.624  0.57
Rangell 2001   10  0.8420  0.0116  0.1118  0.436  0.6213  0.52
Richter 1960   28  0.7729  0.0020  0.1620  0.4210  0.4619  0.44
Richter 1961   33  0.7449  0.0021  0.1121  0.3712  0.4323  0.40
Rosen 1989   37  0.7347  0.0044  0.0643  0.0613  0.3338  0.14
Rubinstein 1939   35  0.7424  0.0033  0.0737  0.0731  0.1345  0.10
Rubinstein 1952   44  0.7038  0.0047  0.0834  0.0839  0.0757  0.07
Rubinstein 1966   36  0.7453  0.0043  0.0738  0.0735  0.0950  0.08
Rudanovskaya 2007   51  0.6752  0.0057  0.0456  0.0430  0.1456  0.07
Shebanova 2002   23  0.7945  0.0028  0.0827  0.2528  0.1532  0.19
Smith 1975   49  0.6754  0.0048  0.0460  0.0428  0.1749  0.08
Sztompka 1959   43  0.7018  0.0153  0.0550  0.0522  0.2741  0.12
Tanyel 1992   3  0.8716  0.0111  0.1419  0.421  0.5416  0.48
Tsujii 2005   5  0.8611  0.028  0.122  0.5820  0.3320  0.44
Uninsky 1959   30  0.7641  0.0046  0.0835  0.0835  0.0755  0.07
Vardi 1988   29  0.7713  0.0127  0.0828  0.2210  0.4828  0.32
Wasowski 1980   46  0.6850  0.0051  0.0363  0.0324  0.1852  0.07
Zimerman 1975   9  0.8517  0.0112  0.1215  0.451  0.6710  0.55
Random 1   65  -0.1165  0.0065  0.0265  0.0258  0.0365  0.02
Random 2   64  -0.0366  0.0064  0.0364  0.0332  0.1061  0.05
Random 3   66  -0.1464  0.0066  0.0166  0.0140  0.0666  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).