Czerny 1989

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   46  0.5131  0.0051  0.0742  0.0748  0.0563  0.06
Ax 1995   8  0.6637  0.0010  0.216  0.6822  0.3611  0.49
Bacha 1998   57  0.4356  0.0056  0.0647  0.0646  0.0661  0.06
Barbosa 1983   25  0.604  0.0322  0.1024  0.339  0.4316  0.38
BenOr 1989   30  0.5864  0.0034  0.1133  0.1151  0.0852  0.09
Biret 1990   42  0.5359  0.0044  0.0937  0.0943  0.0953  0.09
Brailowsky 1960   7  0.6611  0.019  0.157  0.6616  0.505  0.57
Chiu 1999   56  0.4340  0.0057  0.0463  0.0431  0.1754  0.08
Clidat 1994   55  0.4541  0.0048  0.0560  0.0561  0.0465  0.04
Cohen 1997   60  0.3855  0.0062  0.0557  0.0517  0.3149  0.12
Cortot 1951   54  0.4533  0.0058  0.0556  0.053  0.6133  0.17
Csalog 1996   33  0.5624  0.0036  0.1134  0.1118  0.4427  0.22
Czerny 1989   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Ezaki 2006   19  0.6136  0.0031  0.1031  0.2025  0.3123  0.25
Falvay 1989   2  0.707  0.023  0.373  0.7419  0.454  0.58
Fiorentino 1962   20  0.6134  0.0017  0.1314  0.5531  0.2020  0.33
Fliere 1977   18  0.6112  0.0118  0.1019  0.5012  0.4113  0.45
Fou 1978   3  0.702  0.312  0.392  0.751  0.741  0.74
Francois 1956   47  0.5057  0.0039  0.0644  0.0647  0.0764  0.06
Goldenweiser 1946   51  0.4954  0.0050  0.0550  0.0513  0.4934  0.16
Gornostaeva 1994   48  0.5045  0.0047  0.0552  0.0517  0.4041  0.14
Groot 1988   16  0.618  0.015  0.1412  0.5614  0.508  0.53
Hatto 1993   14  0.615  0.0211  0.1418  0.5128  0.2617  0.36
Hatto 1997   15  0.6115  0.0119  0.1017  0.5228  0.2418  0.35
Horszowski 1983   62  0.3747  0.0061  0.0562  0.0518  0.3147  0.12
Indjic 2001   17  0.6149  0.0020  0.1316  0.5230  0.2219  0.34
Katin 1996   29  0.5846  0.0029  0.0923  0.3433  0.1229  0.20
Kiepura 1999   4  0.693  0.074  0.324  0.747  0.682  0.71
Korecka 1992   24  0.6042  0.0028  0.0825  0.339  0.6312  0.46
Kushner 1990   37  0.5460  0.0042  0.0643  0.0636  0.1155  0.08
Lilamand 2001   63  0.3058  0.0063  0.0649  0.0631  0.1156  0.08
Luisada 1990   49  0.5052  0.0049  0.0561  0.0542  0.1060  0.07
Luisada 2008   52  0.4728  0.0053  0.0558  0.0536  0.1159  0.07
Lushtak 2004   11  0.6414  0.0113  0.1213  0.5613  0.507  0.53
Malcuzynski 1951   9  0.6529  0.006  0.148  0.6427  0.2515  0.40
Malcuzynski 1961   1  0.721  0.391  0.381  0.797  0.633  0.71
Magaloff 1977   53  0.4662  0.0054  0.0553  0.0519  0.4040  0.14
Magin 1975   21  0.6125  0.0027  0.0828  0.2932  0.1726  0.22
Meguri 1997   50  0.4953  0.0045  0.0648  0.0618  0.4135  0.16
Milkina 1970   22  0.6020  0.0021  0.1920  0.5036  0.1225  0.24
Mohovich 1999   43  0.5248  0.0040  0.0646  0.0638  0.0762  0.06
Nezu 2005   28  0.5816  0.0135  0.0936  0.0930  0.1946  0.13
Ohlsson 1999   34  0.5630  0.0038  0.0839  0.0833  0.1350  0.10
Olejniczak 1990   13  0.6413  0.0112  0.1211  0.5715  0.489  0.52
Osinska 1989   6  0.6710  0.017  0.135  0.6926  0.3510  0.49
Perlemuter 1992   61  0.3843  0.0060  0.0554  0.0517  0.3243  0.13
Poblocka 1999   26  0.6017  0.0133  0.0935  0.0941  0.0951  0.09
Rangell 2001   44  0.5239  0.0046  0.0551  0.0525  0.4439  0.15
Richter 1960   38  0.5426  0.0043  0.0840  0.083  0.6228  0.22
Richter 1961   59  0.4119  0.0055  0.0555  0.0524  0.3048  0.12
Rosen 1989   31  0.5727  0.0023  0.1129  0.2730  0.2622  0.26
Rubinstein 1939   36  0.5635  0.0032  0.1032  0.1832  0.1930  0.18
Rubinstein 1952   35  0.5663  0.0024  0.0827  0.3042  0.0937  0.16
Rubinstein 1966   27  0.6061  0.0025  0.1022  0.3541  0.0931  0.18
Rudanovskaya 2007   58  0.4150  0.0059  0.0559  0.0524  0.3345  0.13
Shebanova 2002   45  0.5123  0.0052  0.0741  0.0730  0.3636  0.16
Smith 1975   39  0.549  0.0126  0.0926  0.3328  0.2621  0.29
Sztompka 1959   41  0.5332  0.0037  0.0838  0.0828  0.2938  0.15
Tanyel 1992   23  0.6018  0.0115  0.1421  0.4347  0.0732  0.17
Tsujii 2005   12  0.6422  0.0016  0.1315  0.5334  0.1224  0.25
Uninsky 1959   5  0.686  0.028  0.149  0.6419  0.466  0.54
Vardi 1988   32  0.5738  0.0030  0.1130  0.2347  0.0744  0.13
Wasowski 1980   40  0.5444  0.0041  0.0645  0.0626  0.3042  0.13
Zimerman 1975   10  0.6521  0.0014  0.1510  0.6023  0.3214  0.44
Random 1   65  -0.0265  0.0065  0.0264  0.0214  0.3158  0.08
Random 2   64  0.0451  0.0064  0.0265  0.0217  0.3457  0.08
Random 3   66  -0.0566  0.0066  0.0166  0.0162  0.0266  0.01

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).