Richter 1961

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   24  0.4043  0.0014  0.1022  0.3155  0.0526  0.12
Ax 1995   41  0.3515  0.0045  0.0462  0.0459  0.0562  0.04
Bacha 1998   59  0.2436  0.0061  0.0642  0.0663  0.0442  0.05
Barbosa 1983   35  0.3631  0.0031  0.0729  0.1958  0.0529  0.10
BenOr 1989   49  0.3365  0.0051  0.0553  0.0557  0.0463  0.04
Biret 1990   21  0.4161  0.0028  0.0627  0.2261  0.0430  0.09
Brailowsky 1960   19  0.4227  0.0017  0.0823  0.3160  0.0524  0.12
Chiu 1999   31  0.3813  0.0029  0.0628  0.1948  0.0528  0.10
Clidat 1994   8  0.4712  0.0010  0.1310  0.5037  0.0614  0.17
Cohen 1997   54  0.3117  0.0054  0.0644  0.0639  0.0638  0.06
Cortot 1951   46  0.3411  0.0052  0.0646  0.0626  0.2822  0.13
Csalog 1996   44  0.3524  0.0041  0.0548  0.0562  0.0458  0.04
Czerny 1989   22  0.4114  0.0023  0.0824  0.3055  0.0525  0.12
Ezaki 2006   27  0.398  0.0025  0.1125  0.2559  0.0527  0.11
Falvay 1989   15  0.447  0.0021  0.1015  0.3950  0.0712  0.17
Fiorentino 1962   38  0.3645  0.0038  0.0645  0.0660  0.0447  0.05
Fliere 1977   5  0.482  0.032  0.236  0.5826  0.205  0.34
Fou 1978   47  0.3451  0.0037  0.0735  0.0763  0.0441  0.05
Francois 1956   61  0.2232  0.0060  0.0552  0.0558  0.0549  0.05
Goldenweiser 1946   6  0.484  0.0113  0.1114  0.4214  0.474  0.44
Gornostaeva 1994   25  0.3937  0.0027  0.0726  0.2341  0.0721  0.13
Groot 1988   28  0.3825  0.0030  0.0631  0.1761  0.0433  0.08
Hatto 1993   7  0.4730  0.006  0.264  0.6155  0.0611  0.19
Hatto 1997   9  0.4622  0.008  0.228  0.5745  0.079  0.20
Horszowski 1983   52  0.3126  0.0055  0.0558  0.0558  0.0451  0.04
Indjic 2001   11  0.4621  0.007  0.137  0.5749  0.0710  0.20
Katin 1996   53  0.3129  0.0043  0.0736  0.0762  0.0443  0.05
Kiepura 1999   43  0.3544  0.0046  0.0554  0.0563  0.0450  0.04
Korecka 1992   56  0.3041  0.0057  0.0459  0.0460  0.0456  0.04
Kushner 1990   10  0.4623  0.0011  0.1111  0.5063  0.0418  0.14
Lilamand 2001   63  0.0552  0.0063  0.0557  0.0562  0.0360  0.04
Luisada 1990   36  0.3657  0.0036  0.0640  0.0649  0.0736  0.06
Luisada 2008   50  0.3342  0.0042  0.0639  0.0655  0.0635  0.06
Lushtak 2004   3  0.529  0.004  0.243  0.7040  0.078  0.22
Malcuzynski 1951   20  0.4258  0.0022  0.0820  0.3359  0.0523  0.13
Malcuzynski 1961   23  0.4059  0.0019  0.0917  0.3855  0.0617  0.15
Magaloff 1977   18  0.4228  0.0018  0.0919  0.3424  0.296  0.31
Magin 1975   32  0.3847  0.0039  0.0641  0.0661  0.0540  0.05
Meguri 1997   17  0.4416  0.0016  0.0816  0.3840  0.0519  0.14
Milkina 1970   42  0.3519  0.0032  0.0732  0.1356  0.0531  0.08
Mohovich 1999   16  0.4449  0.0015  0.0913  0.4343  0.0615  0.16
Nezu 2005   40  0.3533  0.0049  0.0643  0.0660  0.0545  0.05
Ohlsson 1999   39  0.3635  0.0034  0.0638  0.0656  0.0444  0.05
Olejniczak 1990   14  0.4450  0.0020  0.0718  0.3750  0.0716  0.16
Osinska 1989   37  0.3646  0.0047  0.0461  0.0459  0.0453  0.04
Perlemuter 1992   51  0.326  0.0144  0.0550  0.0554  0.0452  0.04
Poblocka 1999   55  0.3038  0.0053  0.0647  0.0662  0.0439  0.05
Rangell 2001   12  0.4520  0.009  0.159  0.5321  0.473  0.50
Richter 1960   1  0.751  0.891  0.881  0.951  0.911  0.93
Richter 1961   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Rosen 1989   29  0.3840  0.0035  0.0734  0.0763  0.0446  0.05
Rubinstein 1939   45  0.3466  0.0048  0.0556  0.0560  0.0455  0.04
Rubinstein 1952   57  0.2860  0.0056  0.0555  0.0558  0.0548  0.05
Rubinstein 1966   60  0.2364  0.0059  0.0460  0.0462  0.0459  0.04
Rudanovskaya 2007   30  0.3810  0.0033  0.0737  0.0753  0.0537  0.06
Shebanova 2002   4  0.495  0.015  0.315  0.5914  0.482  0.53
Smith 1975   58  0.2454  0.0058  0.0463  0.0462  0.0554  0.04
Sztompka 1959   62  0.1555  0.0062  0.0551  0.0560  0.0457  0.04
Tanyel 1992   2  0.5318  0.003  0.302  0.7340  0.087  0.24
Tsujii 2005   26  0.3939  0.0024  0.1021  0.3252  0.0620  0.14
Uninsky 1959   13  0.4534  0.0012  0.1312  0.4756  0.0613  0.17
Vardi 1988   33  0.383  0.0126  0.0730  0.1861  0.0432  0.08
Wasowski 1980   34  0.3762  0.0040  0.0833  0.0859  0.0534  0.06
Zimerman 1975   48  0.3456  0.0050  0.0549  0.0562  0.0461  0.04
Random 1   65  -0.0848  0.0065  0.0165  0.0144  0.0465  0.02
Random 2   66  -0.0853  0.0066  0.0166  0.0136  0.0564  0.02
Random 3   64  -0.0763  0.0064  0.0264  0.0265  0.0266  0.02

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).