Rudanovskaya 2007

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   40  0.6412  0.027  0.1113  0.4843  0.0523  0.15
Ax 1995   24  0.7110  0.0217  0.1222  0.2849  0.0627  0.13
Bacha 1998   57  0.5060  0.0060  0.0458  0.0446  0.0557  0.04
Barbosa 1983   60  0.3854  0.0032  0.0631  0.1257  0.0433  0.07
BenOr 1989   61  0.3736  0.0055  0.0463  0.0461  0.0463  0.04
Biret 1990   49  0.5825  0.0054  0.0462  0.0438  0.0649  0.05
Brailowsky 1960   45  0.6041  0.0049  0.0638  0.0657  0.0440  0.05
Chiu 1999   30  0.696  0.049  0.1017  0.4419  0.388  0.41
Clidat 1994   26  0.7014  0.0123  0.0820  0.3456  0.0526  0.13
Cohen 1997   44  0.6129  0.0025  0.0824  0.264  0.6312  0.40
Cortot 1951   63  0.1962  0.0063  0.0551  0.0551  0.0465  0.04
Csalog 1996   10  0.789  0.038  0.127  0.5614  0.355  0.44
Czerny 1989   6  0.8130  0.0021  0.1021  0.3428  0.1816  0.25
Ezaki 2006   21  0.7317  0.0142  0.0833  0.0853  0.0536  0.06
Falvay 1989   16  0.7521  0.0120  0.1018  0.4346  0.0522  0.15
Fiorentino 1962   31  0.6964  0.0024  0.0725  0.2659  0.0530  0.11
Fliere 1977   22  0.724  0.0716  0.1119  0.4231  0.1317  0.23
Fou 1978   51  0.5849  0.0039  0.0640  0.0657  0.0542  0.05
Francois 1956   18  0.751  0.211  0.203  0.612  0.691  0.65
Goldenweiser 1946   19  0.7326  0.0033  0.0643  0.0623  0.3124  0.14
Gornostaeva 1994   62  0.2918  0.0159  0.0461  0.0444  0.0562  0.04
Groot 1988   1  0.832  0.192  0.245  0.575  0.403  0.48
Hatto 1993   28  0.7052  0.0043  0.0737  0.0757  0.0450  0.05
Hatto 1997   27  0.7024  0.0046  0.0734  0.0760  0.0445  0.05
Horszowski 1983   29  0.7022  0.0157  0.0459  0.0454  0.0555  0.04
Indjic 2001   25  0.7035  0.0045  0.0735  0.0760  0.0448  0.05
Katin 1996   20  0.7353  0.0029  0.0729  0.1633  0.1125  0.13
Kiepura 1999   59  0.3931  0.0058  0.0460  0.0447  0.0554  0.04
Korecka 1992   53  0.5739  0.0061  0.0457  0.0446  0.0558  0.04
Kushner 1990   58  0.4048  0.0031  0.0532  0.1163  0.0337  0.06
Lilamand 2001   9  0.7819  0.0114  0.1514  0.4713  0.369  0.41
Luisada 1990   33  0.6865  0.0047  0.0644  0.0637  0.0638  0.06
Luisada 2008   52  0.5761  0.0056  0.0455  0.0459  0.0459  0.04
Lushtak 2004   41  0.6416  0.0126  0.0923  0.2851  0.0528  0.12
Malcuzynski 1951   48  0.6043  0.0041  0.0736  0.0757  0.0451  0.05
Malcuzynski 1961   56  0.5156  0.0050  0.0641  0.0659  0.0443  0.05
Magaloff 1977   43  0.6155  0.0037  0.0552  0.0548  0.0546  0.05
Magin 1975   50  0.5859  0.0062  0.0554  0.0563  0.0356  0.04
Meguri 1997   23  0.7120  0.0118  0.1315  0.473  0.407  0.43
Milkina 1970   13  0.7627  0.0015  0.1511  0.4954  0.0521  0.16
Mohovich 1999   2  0.837  0.0412  0.119  0.5531  0.1215  0.26
Nezu 2005   55  0.5451  0.0036  0.0456  0.0459  0.0560  0.04
Ohlsson 1999   4  0.8228  0.005  0.116  0.5613  0.404  0.47
Olejniczak 1990   46  0.6034  0.0052  0.0646  0.0659  0.0452  0.05
Osinska 1989   34  0.6732  0.0030  0.0730  0.1456  0.0432  0.07
Perlemuter 1992   15  0.7644  0.0038  0.0548  0.0527  0.1931  0.10
Poblocka 1999   32  0.6833  0.0040  0.0645  0.0647  0.0541  0.05
Rangell 2001   36  0.6658  0.0048  0.0549  0.0557  0.0464  0.04
Richter 1960   38  0.6515  0.0122  0.0826  0.2332  0.1519  0.19
Richter 1961   39  0.6550  0.0028  0.0627  0.1943  0.0629  0.11
Rosen 1989   8  0.783  0.124  0.211  0.623  0.562  0.59
Rubinstein 1939   17  0.755  0.0410  0.104  0.5823  0.326  0.43
Rubinstein 1952   47  0.6042  0.0035  0.0642  0.0659  0.0553  0.05
Rubinstein 1966   37  0.6540  0.0034  0.0553  0.0549  0.0544  0.05
Rudanovskaya 2007   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Shebanova 2002   7  0.798  0.0311  0.1010  0.5130  0.1414  0.27
Smith 1975   12  0.7737  0.0019  0.1216  0.4515  0.3510  0.40
Sztompka 1959   14  0.7613  0.0227  0.0628  0.1827  0.2618  0.22
Tanyel 1992   35  0.6738  0.0051  0.0639  0.0657  0.0447  0.05
Tsujii 2005   3  0.8311  0.023  0.202  0.6246  0.0620  0.19
Uninsky 1959   5  0.8147  0.0013  0.1112  0.4925  0.1713  0.29
Vardi 1988   11  0.7823  0.016  0.118  0.5521  0.2911  0.40
Wasowski 1980   54  0.5446  0.0044  0.0647  0.0649  0.0539  0.05
Zimerman 1975   42  0.6245  0.0053  0.0550  0.0561  0.0461  0.04
Random 1   66  -0.0766  0.0065  0.0265  0.0215  0.2834  0.07
Random 2   65  -0.0557  0.0064  0.0264  0.0238  0.0666  0.03
Random 3   64  -0.0263  0.0066  0.0166  0.014  0.5235  0.07

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).