Goldenweiser 1946

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   55  0.3236  0.0041  0.0542  0.0548  0.0545  0.05
Ax 1995   32  0.5138  0.0039  0.0546  0.0551  0.0646  0.05
Bacha 1998   46  0.3859  0.0042  0.0449  0.0443  0.0553  0.04
Barbosa 1983   63  0.1555  0.0053  0.0363  0.0361  0.0464  0.03
BenOr 1989   57  0.317  0.029  0.0723  0.3260  0.0428  0.11
Biret 1990   26  0.5517  0.0120  0.0715  0.4063  0.0423  0.13
Brailowsky 1960   41  0.4248  0.0028  0.0929  0.2164  0.0332  0.08
Chiu 1999   52  0.3465  0.0062  0.0545  0.0553  0.0539  0.05
Clidat 1994   42  0.4167  0.0059  0.0362  0.0358  0.0557  0.04
Cohen 1997   50  0.3629  0.0043  0.0544  0.0556  0.0459  0.04
Cortot 1951   61  0.2532  0.0012  0.0720  0.3515  0.413  0.38
Csalog 1996   15  0.6212  0.015  0.146  0.5444  0.059  0.16
Czerny 1989   17  0.6113  0.0138  0.0639  0.0662  0.0440  0.05
Ezaki 2006   27  0.5542  0.0040  0.0547  0.0551  0.0638  0.05
Falvay 1989   7  0.6614  0.0111  0.0919  0.3764  0.0425  0.12
Fiorentino 1962   51  0.3641  0.0061  0.0448  0.0459  0.0560  0.04
Fliere 1977   43  0.4030  0.0050  0.0455  0.0457  0.0549  0.04
Fou 1978   54  0.3246  0.0056  0.0456  0.0464  0.0452  0.04
Francois 1956   48  0.3710  0.0144  0.0543  0.0563  0.0363  0.04
Goldenweiser 1946   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Gornostaeva 1994   64  0.0256  0.0064  0.0450  0.0462  0.0461  0.04
Groot 1988   6  0.6821  0.017  0.145  0.5562  0.0324  0.13
Hatto 1993   16  0.6249  0.0019  0.089  0.5346  0.0512  0.16
Hatto 1997   11  0.6315  0.0117  0.087  0.5344  0.0510  0.16
Horszowski 1983   10  0.6466  0.0027  0.0830  0.2032  0.1213  0.15
Indjic 2001   12  0.639  0.0218  0.078  0.5343  0.0511  0.16
Katin 1996   37  0.4457  0.0060  0.0457  0.0451  0.0555  0.04
Kiepura 1999   62  0.1850  0.0055  0.0452  0.0457  0.0447  0.04
Korecka 1992   25  0.5611  0.0113  0.0712  0.4527  0.206  0.30
Kushner 1990   58  0.3133  0.0031  0.0828  0.2358  0.0429  0.10
Lilamand 2001   2  0.744  0.072  0.172  0.6921  0.232  0.40
Luisada 1990   13  0.6353  0.0016  0.1313  0.4456  0.0514  0.15
Luisada 2008   33  0.5018  0.0115  0.0827  0.2835  0.0622  0.13
Lushtak 2004   35  0.4845  0.0026  0.0825  0.2864  0.0427  0.11
Malcuzynski 1951   40  0.425  0.0235  0.0834  0.0839  0.0537  0.06
Malcuzynski 1961   49  0.3627  0.0032  0.0832  0.1650  0.0531  0.09
Magaloff 1977   56  0.3140  0.0047  0.0640  0.0657  0.0443  0.05
Magin 1975   19  0.6019  0.0124  0.1214  0.4055  0.0515  0.14
Meguri 1997   20  0.592  0.126  0.1316  0.3820  0.255  0.31
Milkina 1970   39  0.4363  0.0051  0.0451  0.0462  0.0454  0.04
Mohovich 1999   9  0.6616  0.018  0.0822  0.3438  0.0618  0.14
Nezu 2005   45  0.4026  0.0033  0.0833  0.1562  0.0433  0.08
Ohlsson 1999   14  0.6222  0.0110  0.0817  0.3762  0.0326  0.11
Olejniczak 1990   24  0.5631  0.0021  0.0910  0.4862  0.0420  0.14
Osinska 1989   28  0.5528  0.0034  0.0736  0.0746  0.0635  0.06
Perlemuter 1992   5  0.7035  0.0025  0.0826  0.2829  0.187  0.22
Poblocka 1999   34  0.4962  0.0037  0.0735  0.0747  0.0536  0.06
Rangell 2001   23  0.5644  0.0022  0.0911  0.4659  0.0419  0.14
Richter 1960   36  0.4420  0.0148  0.0453  0.0447  0.0556  0.04
Richter 1961   44  0.4023  0.0149  0.0454  0.0450  0.0550  0.04
Rosen 1989   31  0.516  0.0230  0.0931  0.1753  0.0434  0.08
Rubinstein 1939   47  0.3734  0.0052  0.0361  0.0362  0.0551  0.04
Rubinstein 1952   60  0.2743  0.0058  0.0364  0.0357  0.0562  0.04
Rubinstein 1966   59  0.2847  0.0063  0.0358  0.0364  0.0365  0.03
Rudanovskaya 2007   3  0.7337  0.0014  0.0824  0.3144  0.0616  0.14
Shebanova 2002   29  0.5251  0.0046  0.0738  0.0764  0.0442  0.05
Smith 1975   8  0.663  0.103  0.153  0.6828  0.184  0.35
Sztompka 1959   1  0.771  0.371  0.371  0.719  0.541  0.62
Tanyel 1992   18  0.618  0.0223  0.0818  0.3741  0.0517  0.14
Tsujii 2005   22  0.5839  0.0036  0.0737  0.0762  0.0444  0.05
Uninsky 1959   4  0.7224  0.014  0.214  0.6656  0.058  0.18
Vardi 1988   30  0.5260  0.0045  0.0541  0.0541  0.0641  0.05
Wasowski 1980   53  0.3252  0.0057  0.0360  0.0349  0.0548  0.04
Zimerman 1975   38  0.4454  0.0054  0.0359  0.0364  0.0466  0.03
Average   21  0.5825  0.0129  0.0921  0.3460  0.0521  0.13
Random 1   67  -0.0958  0.0066  0.0266  0.0257  0.0367  0.02
Random 2   66  -0.0764  0.0065  0.0365  0.0317  0.3130  0.10
Random 3   65  -0.0761  0.0067  0.0167  0.0127  0.2058  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).