Random 3

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   11  0.0116  0.0120  0.0721  0.2164  0.0225  0.06
Ashkenazy 1981   23  0.0024  0.0135  0.0636  0.0664  0.0247  0.03
Beliavsky 2004   33  -0.014  0.0616  0.0725  0.1765  0.0222  0.06
BenOr 1989   50  -0.0345  0.0042  0.0544  0.0565  0.0249  0.03
Biret 1990   40  -0.0262  0.0043  0.0640  0.0665  0.0251  0.03
Blet 2003   20  0.0044  0.0031  0.0629  0.1165  0.0229  0.05
Block 1995   36  -0.018  0.0219  0.0723  0.2064  0.0226  0.06
Brailowsky 1960   21  0.0015  0.0125  0.0724  0.1965  0.0221  0.06
Chiu 1999   7  0.025  0.046  0.136  0.5364  0.024  0.10
Clidat 1994   29  -0.0120  0.0124  0.0722  0.2165  0.0224  0.06
Cohen 1997   30  -0.0156  0.0045  0.0352  0.0365  0.0264  0.02
Coop 1987   44  -0.0259  0.0046  0.0445  0.0465  0.0238  0.03
Cortot 1951   8  0.0217  0.018  0.133  0.5464  0.029  0.10
Czerny 1949   46  -0.0227  0.0057  0.0543  0.0565  0.0241  0.03
Czerny 1949b   32  -0.0139  0.0036  0.0634  0.0664  0.0236  0.03
Ezaki 2006   62  -0.0649  0.0064  0.0262  0.0265  0.0252  0.02
Falvay 1989   16  0.0119  0.0117  0.0919  0.2965  0.0216  0.08
Ferenczy 1958   60  -0.0547  0.0056  0.0448  0.0465  0.0240  0.03
Fiorentino 1962   25  0.0051  0.0034  0.0638  0.0665  0.0248  0.03
Fliere 1977   18  0.0042  0.0023  0.0820  0.2765  0.0220  0.07
Fou 1978   42  -0.0241  0.0050  0.0446  0.0465  0.0237  0.03
Francois 1956   14  0.0146  0.0010  0.139  0.4665  0.0210  0.10
Hatto 1997   10  0.0122  0.0112  0.108  0.5065  0.027  0.10
Horowitz 1971   5  0.0311  0.027  0.125  0.5364  0.028  0.10
Horowitz 1985   3  0.0410  0.029  0.147  0.5064  0.033  0.12
Indjic 2001   15  0.0155  0.0013  0.1012  0.4365  0.0214  0.09
Kapell 1951   31  -0.0134  0.0032  0.0631  0.1164  0.0228  0.05
Kiepura 1999   6  0.0318  0.0111  0.1811  0.4563  0.0211  0.09
Kilenyi 1937   39  -0.029  0.0230  0.0532  0.1064  0.0233  0.04
Kissin 1993   59  -0.0561  0.0061  0.0263  0.0265  0.0260  0.02
Kitain 1937   41  -0.0250  0.0029  0.0528  0.1364  0.0231  0.05
Kushner 1990   56  -0.0423  0.0148  0.0357  0.0365  0.0259  0.02
Levy 1951   13  0.0135  0.0014  0.1113  0.4364  0.0212  0.09
Luisada 1990   22  0.0029  0.0033  0.0635  0.0664  0.0243  0.03
Lushtak 2004   52  -0.0360  0.0026  0.0630  0.1165  0.0230  0.05
Lympany 1968   9  0.0254  0.0021  0.0718  0.3065  0.0215  0.08
Magaloff 1977   61  -0.0540  0.0059  0.0353  0.0365  0.0261  0.02
Magaloff 1977b   58  -0.0533  0.0058  0.0447  0.0465  0.0245  0.03
Magin 1975   37  -0.0157  0.0040  0.0637  0.0665  0.0235  0.03
Milkina 1970   48  -0.0253  0.0054  0.0354  0.0365  0.0258  0.02
Mohovich 1999   38  -0.0230  0.0044  0.0449  0.0465  0.0246  0.03
Nadelmann 1956   24  0.0028  0.0018  0.0915  0.3365  0.0218  0.08
Ohlsson 1999   12  0.016  0.042  0.162  0.5464  0.025  0.10
Olejniczac 1990   35  -0.0137  0.0041  0.0542  0.0565  0.0242  0.03
Olejniczak 1991   54  -0.0443  0.0049  0.0356  0.0365  0.0256  0.02
Osinska 1989   65  -0.0865  0.0065  0.0265  0.0265  0.0253  0.02
Paderewski 1912   55  -0.0432  0.0047  0.0355  0.0365  0.0262  0.02
Perahia 1994   49  -0.0348  0.0038  0.0541  0.0565  0.0244  0.03
Perlemuter 1986   2  0.047  0.023  0.154  0.5465  0.026  0.10
Poblocka 1999   43  -0.0263  0.0053  0.0359  0.0365  0.0254  0.02
Rangell 2001   51  -0.0321  0.0151  0.0450  0.0465  0.0250  0.03
Risler 1920   28  0.0026  0.0037  0.0639  0.0665  0.0234  0.03
Rosen 1989   53  -0.0358  0.0055  0.0358  0.0365  0.0263  0.02
Rubinstein 1939   26  0.0014  0.0115  0.0817  0.3165  0.0217  0.08
Rubinstein 1952   47  -0.0252  0.0052  0.0360  0.0365  0.0265  0.02
Rubinstein 1966   57  -0.0438  0.0060  0.0451  0.0465  0.0239  0.03
Rummel 1943   19  0.002  0.084  0.1514  0.4264  0.0213  0.09
Shebanova 2002   17  0.0131  0.0027  0.0726  0.1765  0.0223  0.06
Smith 1975   64  -0.0612  0.0263  0.0264  0.0265  0.0255  0.02
Szpilman 1948   34  -0.0136  0.0028  0.0527  0.1564  0.0227  0.05
Uninsky 1971   27  0.0013  0.0122  0.0816  0.3165  0.0219  0.08
Wasowski 1980   45  -0.0225  0.0139  0.0733  0.0765  0.0232  0.04
Weissenberg 1971   63  -0.0664  0.0062  0.0261  0.0265  0.0257  0.02
Random 1    4  0.041  0.411  0.401  0.643  0.581  0.61
Random 2   1  0.073  0.075  0.1410  0.4627  0.112  0.22
Random 3   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target

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).