Ohlsson 1999

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   15  0.657  0.0316  0.1213  0.552  0.666  0.60
Ax 1995   22  0.6339  0.0024  0.1123  0.3834  0.1233  0.21
Bacha 1998   48  0.5155  0.0050  0.0940  0.0931  0.2043  0.13
Barbosa 1983   30  0.6028  0.0037  0.0845  0.0822  0.2740  0.15
BenOr 1989   20  0.648  0.0223  0.1019  0.4723  0.3221  0.39
Biret 1990   41  0.5546  0.0040  0.1234  0.1232  0.1544  0.13
Brailowsky 1960   31  0.6052  0.0029  0.0929  0.2129  0.2231  0.21
Chiu 1999   50  0.4956  0.0046  0.0847  0.085  0.6230  0.22
Clidat 1994   37  0.563  0.148  0.1717  0.501  0.6010  0.55
Cohen 1997   60  0.3629  0.0062  0.0555  0.0529  0.1455  0.08
Cortot 1951   62  0.3459  0.0063  0.0554  0.0539  0.0756  0.06
Csalog 1996   44  0.5461  0.0047  0.0942  0.0934  0.0951  0.09
Czerny 1989   40  0.5647  0.0041  0.1333  0.1339  0.0848  0.10
Ezaki 2006   19  0.6416  0.0118  0.1420  0.4014  0.4816  0.44
Falvay 1989   1  0.712  0.142  0.174  0.7223  0.4111  0.54
Fiorentino 1962   33  0.6030  0.0038  0.1136  0.1142  0.0950  0.10
Fliere 1977   47  0.5257  0.0045  0.0944  0.0930  0.1445  0.11
Fou 1978   18  0.6413  0.0111  0.1515  0.5320  0.4414  0.48
Francois 1956   36  0.5724  0.0027  0.0728  0.229  0.4324  0.31
Goldenweiser 1946   57  0.3931  0.0058  0.0461  0.0458  0.0562  0.04
Gornostaeva 1994   54  0.4353  0.0052  0.0460  0.0438  0.0760  0.05
Groot 1988   46  0.5321  0.0048  0.1137  0.1145  0.0752  0.09
Hatto 1993   5  0.6911  0.017  0.196  0.709  0.654  0.67
Hatto 1997   2  0.706  0.074  0.251  0.758  0.691  0.72
Horszowski 1983   63  0.3234  0.0061  0.0363  0.0338  0.0561  0.04
Indjic 2001   4  0.699  0.025  0.203  0.7410  0.653  0.69
Katin 1996   14  0.6527  0.0019  0.1116  0.5228  0.2920  0.39
Kiepura 1999   42  0.5564  0.0043  0.0751  0.0741  0.0953  0.08
Korecka 1992   51  0.4636  0.0051  0.1135  0.1136  0.1047  0.10
Kushner 1990   24  0.6235  0.0022  0.1322  0.3818  0.4319  0.40
Lilamand 2001   52  0.4420  0.0053  0.0462  0.047  0.5341  0.15
Luisada 1990   29  0.6154  0.0035  0.0941  0.0922  0.4636  0.20
Luisada 2008   32  0.6015  0.0131  0.0832  0.1519  0.5426  0.28
Lushtak 2004   12  0.6641  0.0013  0.118  0.6314  0.509  0.56
Malcuzynski 1951   11  0.6642  0.0017  0.1218  0.4834  0.1229  0.24
Malcuzynski 1961   13  0.6637  0.0015  0.1112  0.5631  0.1425  0.28
Magaloff 1977   59  0.3862  0.0059  0.0552  0.0553  0.0659  0.05
Magin 1975   23  0.6332  0.0026  0.1325  0.3721  0.3922  0.38
Meguri 1997   53  0.4365  0.0054  0.0458  0.0445  0.0564  0.04
Milkina 1970   3  0.701  0.221  0.222  0.7514  0.495  0.61
Mohovich 1999   39  0.5644  0.0036  0.0849  0.0817  0.3538  0.17
Nezu 2005   7  0.6918  0.006  0.185  0.719  0.742  0.72
Ohlsson 1999   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Olejniczak 1990   16  0.6445  0.0014  0.0914  0.5418  0.4315  0.48
Osinska 1989   26  0.6123  0.0032  0.0831  0.1536  0.1242  0.13
Perlemuter 1992   58  0.3848  0.0060  0.0553  0.0559  0.0463  0.04
Poblocka 1999   21  0.6412  0.0120  0.1324  0.3722  0.4717  0.42
Rangell 2001   45  0.5360  0.0049  0.0943  0.0918  0.4934  0.21
Richter 1960   55  0.4240  0.0057  0.0457  0.0435  0.0758  0.05
Richter 1961   61  0.3649  0.0056  0.0456  0.0438  0.0657  0.05
Rosen 1989   38  0.5643  0.0039  0.1038  0.1039  0.0754  0.08
Rubinstein 1939   35  0.5933  0.0033  0.0848  0.0825  0.4037  0.18
Rubinstein 1952   28  0.6151  0.0028  0.1027  0.2325  0.2728  0.25
Rubinstein 1966   25  0.6225  0.0030  0.0830  0.1927  0.2332  0.21
Rudanovskaya 2007   56  0.4150  0.0055  0.0459  0.0425  0.3246  0.11
Shebanova 2002   49  0.5117  0.0142  0.0850  0.0815  0.4835  0.20
Smith 1975   17  0.6410  0.0125  0.1621  0.3913  0.4218  0.40
Sztompka 1959   43  0.5422  0.0044  0.0846  0.0827  0.3039  0.15
Tanyel 1992   9  0.6719  0.0012  0.149  0.6318  0.4313  0.52
Tsujii 2005   6  0.694  0.133  0.237  0.6815  0.497  0.58
Uninsky 1959   10  0.6738  0.0010  0.1611  0.5913  0.538  0.56
Vardi 1988   27  0.6114  0.0121  0.1126  0.3128  0.3223  0.31
Wasowski 1980   34  0.5958  0.0034  0.0939  0.096  0.7027  0.25
Zimerman 1975   8  0.675  0.089  0.1510  0.6117  0.4612  0.53
Random 1   66  -0.0226  0.0066  0.0166  0.0145  0.0466  0.02
Random 2   64  0.0263  0.0064  0.0264  0.029  0.5249  0.10
Random 3   65  0.0166  0.0065  0.0265  0.0235  0.0665  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).