Blet 2003

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   15  0.7220  0.0029  0.0627  0.1928  0.2116  0.20
Ashkenazy 1981   11  0.7314  0.0112  0.1312  0.4640  0.0818  0.19
Beliavsky 2004   46  0.6458  0.0036  0.0556  0.0559  0.0464  0.04
BenOr 1989   5  0.7617  0.015  0.174  0.6733  0.0912  0.25
Biret 1990   17  0.7159  0.0025  0.0719  0.2641  0.0727  0.13
Blet 2003   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Block 1995   13  0.7225  0.0019  0.1217  0.3229  0.2211  0.27
Brailowsky 1960   24  0.7048  0.0034  0.0637  0.0620  0.3124  0.14
Chiu 1999   30  0.6937  0.0033  0.0645  0.0640  0.0745  0.06
Clidat 1994   37  0.6731  0.0037  0.0640  0.0656  0.0460  0.05
Cohen 1997   34  0.6860  0.0045  0.0461  0.0432  0.1050  0.06
Coop 1987   53  0.6265  0.0056  0.0639  0.0652  0.0554  0.05
Cortot 1951   7  0.7543  0.0011  0.1211  0.4718  0.369  0.41
Czerny 1949   51  0.6262  0.0058  0.0462  0.0446  0.0658  0.05
Czerny 1949b   59  0.5728  0.0059  0.0460  0.0450  0.0652  0.05
Ezaki 2006   40  0.6657  0.0051  0.0552  0.0535  0.0941  0.07
Falvay 1989   2  0.805  0.032  0.242  0.753  0.652  0.70
Ferenczy 1958   54  0.6227  0.0055  0.0546  0.0531  0.1537  0.09
Fiorentino 1962   6  0.7640  0.008  0.207  0.6430  0.268  0.41
Fliere 1977   16  0.7119  0.0016  0.1315  0.3256  0.0431  0.11
Fou 1978   47  0.6329  0.0046  0.0555  0.0549  0.0653  0.05
Francois 1956   61  0.5410  0.0161  0.0547  0.0510  0.5522  0.17
Hatto 1997   29  0.6955  0.0044  0.0553  0.0536  0.0749  0.06
Horowitz 1971   32  0.687  0.0313  0.1314  0.423  0.595  0.50
Horowitz 1985   58  0.5733  0.0052  0.0458  0.0427  0.1839  0.08
Indjic 2001   12  0.7216  0.0128  0.0723  0.2040  0.0730  0.12
Kapell 1951   23  0.7046  0.0024  0.0622  0.2436  0.0825  0.14
Kiepura 1999   44  0.6450  0.0054  0.0635  0.0631  0.1834  0.10
Kilenyi 1937   52  0.6232  0.0050  0.0641  0.0652  0.0557  0.05
Kissin 1993   18  0.7126  0.0010  0.138  0.5542  0.0619  0.18
Kitain 1937   57  0.5841  0.0053  0.0550  0.057  0.5223  0.16
Kushner 1990   45  0.6453  0.0047  0.0557  0.0522  0.2929  0.12
Levy 1951   36  0.6712  0.0121  0.0626  0.1943  0.0632  0.11
Luisada 1990   28  0.6949  0.0043  0.0551  0.0545  0.0661  0.05
Lushtak 2004   21  0.7144  0.0035  0.0644  0.0621  0.3226  0.14
Lympany 1968   3  0.792  0.083  0.333  0.742  0.791  0.76
Magaloff 1977   48  0.6354  0.0048  0.0642  0.0659  0.0559  0.05
Magaloff 1977b   49  0.6247  0.0049  0.0548  0.0549  0.0663  0.05
Magin 1975   26  0.699  0.0138  0.0734  0.0744  0.0647  0.06
Milkina 1970   14  0.7235  0.0031  0.0530  0.1352  0.0540  0.08
Mohovich 1999   9  0.7411  0.017  0.205  0.6714  0.524  0.59
Nadelmann 1956   8  0.744  0.056  0.1410  0.4911  0.426  0.45
Ohlsson 1999   62  0.5361  0.0062  0.0643  0.0657  0.0455  0.05
Olejniczac 1990   4  0.778  0.024  0.266  0.6729  0.287  0.43
Olejniczak 1991   27  0.6922  0.0017  0.1016  0.3235  0.0920  0.17
Osinska 1989   20  0.7142  0.0027  0.0728  0.1652  0.0636  0.10
Paderewski 1912   60  0.5539  0.0057  0.0463  0.0452  0.0565  0.04
Perahia 1994   42  0.6523  0.0032  0.0631  0.1212  0.3517  0.20
Perlemuter 1986   10  0.743  0.069  0.119  0.522  0.673  0.59
Poblocka 1999   22  0.7013  0.0123  0.0720  0.2547  0.0628  0.12
Rangell 2001   31  0.6918  0.0118  0.1121  0.2430  0.2214  0.23
Risler 1920   63  0.4264  0.0063  0.0554  0.0557  0.0551  0.05
Rosen 1989   55  0.6245  0.0060  0.0638  0.0649  0.0562  0.05
Rubinstein 1939   50  0.6221  0.0042  0.0549  0.0540  0.0746  0.06
Rubinstein 1952   41  0.6536  0.0020  0.0729  0.1527  0.1921  0.17
Rubinstein 1966   39  0.6734  0.0041  0.0459  0.0438  0.0656  0.05
Rummel 1943   56  0.616  0.0315  0.1418  0.2816  0.3410  0.31
Shebanova 2002   38  0.6724  0.0030  0.0632  0.1138  0.0543  0.07
Smith 1975   19  0.7130  0.0014  0.1713  0.4436  0.1015  0.21
Szpilman 1948   43  0.6556  0.0039  0.0636  0.0637  0.0744  0.06
Uninsky 1971   35  0.6815  0.0122  0.0724  0.2040  0.0633  0.11
Wasowski 1980   25  0.6938  0.0026  0.0625  0.1953  0.0535  0.10
Weissenberg 1971   33  0.6851  0.0040  0.0733  0.0757  0.0548  0.06
Average   1  0.821  0.591  0.581  0.8837  0.0613  0.23
Random 1    66  0.0063  0.0065  0.0265  0.0227  0.2342  0.07
Random 2   64  0.0266  0.0064  0.0364  0.0311  0.3038  0.09
Random 3   65  0.0052  0.0066  0.0166  0.0129  0.1166  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).