Lushtak 2004

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   26  0.6140  0.0022  0.0825  0.2411  0.5120  0.35
Ax 1995   16  0.6539  0.0015  0.1211  0.5421  0.3715  0.45
Bacha 1998   52  0.4928  0.0052  0.0649  0.0626  0.2546  0.12
Barbosa 1983   29  0.5933  0.0030  0.0730  0.174  0.5326  0.30
BenOr 1989   18  0.6517  0.0121  0.0923  0.2925  0.2927  0.29
Biret 1990   40  0.5634  0.0039  0.0645  0.0628  0.2548  0.12
Brailowsky 1960   23  0.6320  0.0120  0.0920  0.3820  0.3617  0.37
Chiu 1999   59  0.4166  0.0059  0.0463  0.0445  0.0664  0.05
Clidat 1994   34  0.5825  0.0025  0.0828  0.218  0.5323  0.33
Cohen 1997   61  0.3962  0.0060  0.0555  0.056  0.5537  0.17
Cortot 1951   56  0.4656  0.0058  0.0461  0.042  0.6439  0.16
Csalog 1996   51  0.5047  0.0051  0.0556  0.0535  0.0861  0.06
Czerny 1989   20  0.6430  0.0017  0.1313  0.5013  0.5610  0.53
Ezaki 2006   6  0.694  0.057  0.1710  0.541  0.666  0.60
Falvay 1989   8  0.6619  0.0111  0.138  0.5730  0.2219  0.35
Fiorentino 1962   24  0.6218  0.0126  0.0724  0.2725  0.3028  0.28
Fliere 1977   25  0.615  0.039  0.1615  0.486  0.4913  0.48
Fou 1978   35  0.5826  0.0034  0.0935  0.0935  0.0856  0.08
Francois 1956   43  0.5445  0.0041  0.0837  0.0818  0.3538  0.17
Goldenweiser 1946   57  0.4559  0.0056  0.0648  0.0622  0.3541  0.14
Gornostaeva 1994   55  0.4848  0.0050  0.0557  0.0522  0.2947  0.12
Groot 1988   42  0.5410  0.0236  0.0739  0.0730  0.1949  0.12
Hatto 1993   2  0.7321  0.015  0.324  0.7312  0.634  0.68
Hatto 1997   1  0.743  0.133  0.302  0.754  0.722  0.73
Horszowski 1983   62  0.3657  0.0062  0.0554  0.0519  0.3145  0.12
Indjic 2001   3  0.736  0.024  0.243  0.7411  0.633  0.68
Katin 1996   31  0.5815  0.0127  0.0726  0.2327  0.3029  0.26
Kiepura 1999   22  0.6349  0.0028  0.0727  0.2212  0.4524  0.31
Korecka 1992   41  0.5460  0.0048  0.0462  0.0425  0.3251  0.11
Kushner 1990   33  0.5822  0.0142  0.0934  0.0937  0.0953  0.09
Lilamand 2001   63  0.3452  0.0063  0.0651  0.0637  0.0662  0.06
Luisada 1990   30  0.5931  0.0037  0.0646  0.0625  0.3343  0.14
Luisada 2008   36  0.5837  0.0044  0.0647  0.0631  0.2844  0.13
Lushtak 2004   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Malcuzynski 1951   4  0.722  0.202  0.305  0.705  0.655  0.67
Malcuzynski 1961   11  0.667  0.026  0.226  0.6520  0.4411  0.53
Magaloff 1977   54  0.4842  0.0055  0.0559  0.0520  0.3942  0.14
Magin 1975   10  0.6611  0.0114  0.1118  0.4414  0.5314  0.48
Meguri 1997   38  0.5750  0.0033  0.0836  0.081  0.7130  0.24
Milkina 1970   17  0.6538  0.0016  0.1412  0.5329  0.2221  0.34
Mohovich 1999   7  0.6912  0.0112  0.149  0.554  0.628  0.58
Nezu 2005   15  0.6523  0.0123  0.1022  0.2925  0.3922  0.34
Ohlsson 1999   12  0.668  0.0210  0.1414  0.508  0.639  0.56
Olejniczak 1990   19  0.649  0.0224  0.1021  0.3129  0.3125  0.31
Osinska 1989   9  0.6629  0.008  0.187  0.6416  0.557  0.59
Perlemuter 1992   53  0.4846  0.0054  0.0742  0.076  0.5235  0.19
Poblocka 1999   39  0.5658  0.0045  0.0643  0.0631  0.2050  0.11
Rangell 2001   28  0.6036  0.0031  0.0829  0.181  0.8016  0.38
Richter 1960   45  0.5414  0.0146  0.0838  0.084  0.6133  0.22
Richter 1961   49  0.5224  0.0043  0.0740  0.073  0.7032  0.22
Rosen 1989   14  0.6613  0.0118  0.1216  0.468  0.5912  0.52
Rubinstein 1939   44  0.5453  0.0038  0.0650  0.0637  0.1055  0.08
Rubinstein 1952   47  0.5243  0.0040  0.0741  0.0737  0.1058  0.08
Rubinstein 1966   46  0.5332  0.0047  0.0644  0.0637  0.1057  0.08
Rudanovskaya 2007   60  0.4063  0.0061  0.0558  0.0532  0.1554  0.09
Shebanova 2002   50  0.5141  0.0049  0.0560  0.0517  0.4740  0.15
Smith 1975   32  0.5844  0.0035  0.1033  0.1024  0.3336  0.18
Sztompka 1959   58  0.4451  0.0057  0.0553  0.0535  0.1059  0.07
Tanyel 1992   5  0.711  0.331  0.331  0.772  0.731  0.75
Tsujii 2005   13  0.6635  0.0013  0.1217  0.4435  0.1231  0.23
Uninsky 1959   21  0.6327  0.0019  0.1019  0.3921  0.3518  0.37
Vardi 1988   37  0.5716  0.0129  0.0832  0.1729  0.2634  0.21
Wasowski 1980   48  0.5255  0.0053  0.0552  0.0540  0.0860  0.06
Zimerman 1975   27  0.6161  0.0032  0.0931  0.1751  0.0652  0.10
Random 1   65  -0.0154  0.0066  0.0166  0.0126  0.1465  0.04
Random 2   64  0.0064  0.0065  0.0265  0.0229  0.1863  0.06
Random 3   66  -0.0265  0.0064  0.0264  0.0236  0.0566  0.03

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).