Clidat 1994

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   14  0.554  0.063  0.234  0.589  0.561  0.57
Ax 1995   18  0.5441  0.0023  0.1125  0.2954  0.0637  0.13
Bacha 1998   58  0.3729  0.0053  0.0456  0.0442  0.0761  0.05
Barbosa 1983   34  0.5018  0.0032  0.0730  0.1830  0.1625  0.17
BenOr 1989   11  0.5510  0.019  0.1118  0.4144  0.0922  0.19
Biret 1990   27  0.5226  0.0037  0.0547  0.0534  0.1152  0.07
Brailowsky 1960   19  0.5327  0.0024  0.0917  0.4257  0.0629  0.16
Chiu 1999   32  0.5022  0.0036  0.0642  0.067  0.6020  0.19
Clidat 1994   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Cohen 1997   64  0.2330  0.0064  0.0548  0.0558  0.0465  0.04
Cortot 1951   60  0.3558  0.0062  0.0550  0.0528  0.2840  0.12
Csalog 1996   39  0.4836  0.0050  0.0545  0.0539  0.0857  0.06
Czerny 1989   46  0.4543  0.0047  0.0462  0.0461  0.0564  0.04
Ezaki 2006   33  0.5013  0.0125  0.0826  0.2733  0.1517  0.20
Falvay 1989   9  0.5659  0.0015  0.1112  0.4646  0.0821  0.19
Fiorentino 1962   22  0.5323  0.0020  0.0823  0.3141  0.0927  0.17
Fliere 1977   44  0.4533  0.0048  0.0552  0.0535  0.0853  0.06
Fou 1978   31  0.5150  0.0019  0.0921  0.3733  0.1512  0.24
Francois 1956   54  0.4314  0.0131  0.0733  0.1433  0.1239  0.13
Goldenweiser 1946   56  0.4354  0.0058  0.0554  0.0538  0.0659  0.05
Gornostaeva 1994   45  0.4532  0.0054  0.0553  0.0545  0.0663  0.05
Groot 1988   20  0.5316  0.0028  0.0729  0.1949  0.0641  0.11
Hatto 1993   5  0.5755  0.0017  0.0816  0.4341  0.0823  0.19
Hatto 1997   10  0.5631  0.0021  0.0920  0.3941  0.0726  0.17
Horszowski 1983   61  0.3534  0.0059  0.0639  0.0614  0.4228  0.16
Indjic 2001   6  0.5739  0.0018  0.1014  0.4454  0.0631  0.16
Katin 1996   50  0.4453  0.0038  0.0551  0.0549  0.0755  0.06
Kiepura 1999   37  0.4942  0.0052  0.0835  0.0852  0.0646  0.07
Korecka 1992   35  0.4925  0.0040  0.0836  0.0834  0.1242  0.10
Kushner 1990   16  0.5421  0.0013  0.1110  0.5231  0.235  0.35
Lilamand 2001   63  0.2849  0.0063  0.0458  0.0431  0.1148  0.07
Luisada 1990   43  0.4762  0.0049  0.0549  0.0545  0.0951  0.07
Luisada 2008   48  0.4446  0.0055  0.0546  0.0536  0.1149  0.07
Lushtak 2004   4  0.5811  0.0111  0.109  0.5329  0.216  0.33
Malcuzynski 1951   3  0.592  0.094  0.2213  0.4541  0.0919  0.20
Malcuzynski 1961   8  0.5612  0.016  0.153  0.5944  0.0815  0.22
Magaloff 1977   53  0.4319  0.0057  0.0737  0.0738  0.0944  0.08
Magin 1975   25  0.5240  0.0033  0.1128  0.2143  0.0934  0.14
Meguri 1997   51  0.4452  0.0045  0.0455  0.0420  0.4036  0.13
Milkina 1970   23  0.537  0.015  0.1911  0.5133  0.159  0.28
Mohovich 1999   24  0.5220  0.0016  0.0922  0.3135  0.0832  0.16
Nezu 2005   17  0.5451  0.0022  0.1219  0.4033  0.1611  0.25
Ohlsson 1999   7  0.563  0.062  0.222  0.6018  0.502  0.55
Olejniczak 1990   2  0.6060  0.007  0.166  0.5731  0.234  0.36
Osinska 1989   36  0.4945  0.0039  0.0641  0.0650  0.0847  0.07
Perlemuter 1992   59  0.376  0.0261  0.0463  0.0438  0.0660  0.05
Poblocka 1999   40  0.4867  0.0041  0.0640  0.0640  0.1143  0.08
Rangell 2001   57  0.4156  0.0056  0.0544  0.0530  0.3338  0.13
Richter 1960   41  0.4715  0.0135  0.0643  0.0618  0.4130  0.16
Richter 1961   42  0.479  0.0151  0.0638  0.0611  0.5024  0.17
Rosen 1989   21  0.5338  0.0034  0.1234  0.1245  0.0645  0.08
Rubinstein 1939   30  0.5163  0.0030  0.0831  0.1842  0.0935  0.13
Rubinstein 1952   52  0.4347  0.0043  0.0464  0.0441  0.1058  0.06
Rubinstein 1966   55  0.4357  0.0046  0.0457  0.0452  0.0662  0.05
Rudanovskaya 2007   38  0.485  0.0242  0.0459  0.049  0.5533  0.15
Shebanova 2002   49  0.4428  0.0029  0.0832  0.1719  0.4510  0.28
Smith 1975   47  0.4448  0.0044  0.0460  0.0449  0.0854  0.06
Sztompka 1959   62  0.3564  0.0060  0.0461  0.0441  0.0856  0.06
Tanyel 1992   12  0.5537  0.0012  0.127  0.5540  0.0816  0.21
Tsujii 2005   15  0.548  0.0110  0.108  0.5438  0.1014  0.23
Uninsky 1959   13  0.5524  0.008  0.185  0.5729  0.283  0.40
Vardi 1988   28  0.5117  0.0014  0.1115  0.4334  0.1213  0.23
Wasowski 1980   26  0.5244  0.0027  0.0727  0.2121  0.427  0.30
Zimerman 1975   29  0.5135  0.0026  0.0624  0.3033  0.1318  0.20
Average   1  0.681  0.601  0.591  0.8339  0.118  0.30
Random 1   67  -0.0366  0.0067  0.0167  0.0161  0.0367  0.02
Random 2   66  -0.0261  0.0066  0.0266  0.0221  0.2550  0.07
Random 3   65  -0.0165  0.0065  0.0265  0.0239  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).