Lushtak 2004

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   33  0.6616  0.0034  0.0640  0.0635  0.0643  0.06
Ashkenazy 1981   2  0.766  0.032  0.332  0.7434  0.128  0.30
Beliavsky 2004   59  0.5353  0.0063  0.0554  0.0546  0.0549  0.05
BenOr 1989   11  0.7118  0.0015  0.1614  0.4548  0.0617  0.16
Biret 1990   4  0.7439  0.005  0.233  0.6546  0.0612  0.20
Blet 2003   13  0.7144  0.0017  0.0921  0.3244  0.0620  0.14
Block 1995   24  0.6835  0.0038  0.0637  0.0648  0.0555  0.05
Brailowsky 1960   48  0.6260  0.0053  0.0638  0.0658  0.0446  0.05
Chiu 1999   32  0.6726  0.0027  0.0728  0.1745  0.0630  0.10
Clidat 1994   47  0.6232  0.0046  0.0641  0.0651  0.0554  0.05
Cohen 1997   37  0.6658  0.0044  0.0553  0.0538  0.0744  0.06
Coop 1987   30  0.6749  0.0028  0.0627  0.2145  0.0629  0.11
Cortot 1951   3  0.754  0.054  0.217  0.6117  0.402  0.49
Czerny 1949   44  0.6437  0.0048  0.0645  0.0663  0.0453  0.05
Czerny 1949b   16  0.7017  0.009  0.239  0.5725  0.284  0.40
Ezaki 2006   7  0.735  0.048  0.208  0.6132  0.186  0.33
Falvay 1989   8  0.7210  0.0111  0.1210  0.4944  0.0613  0.17
Ferenczy 1958   52  0.6043  0.0049  0.0546  0.0547  0.0462  0.04
Fiorentino 1962   26  0.6862  0.0022  0.1018  0.3461  0.0427  0.12
Fliere 1977   17  0.6923  0.0024  0.0824  0.2743  0.0621  0.13
Fou 1978   42  0.6548  0.0035  0.0644  0.0650  0.0548  0.05
Francois 1956   61  0.5245  0.0062  0.0551  0.0524  0.3423  0.13
Hatto 1997   15  0.7051  0.0018  0.1019  0.3439  0.0719  0.15
Horowitz 1971   50  0.6236  0.0047  0.0547  0.0540  0.0745  0.06
Horowitz 1985   57  0.5620  0.0037  0.0643  0.0630  0.1333  0.09
Indjic 2001   18  0.6950  0.0030  0.0729  0.1752  0.0535  0.09
Kapell 1951   38  0.6656  0.0032  0.0732  0.1254  0.0537  0.08
Kiepura 1999   49  0.6233  0.0055  0.0550  0.0562  0.0358  0.04
Kilenyi 1937   53  0.6031  0.0051  0.0555  0.0549  0.0652  0.05
Kissin 1993   40  0.668  0.0123  0.0922  0.3051  0.0525  0.12
Kitain 1937   63  0.4919  0.0058  0.0461  0.0442  0.0656  0.05
Kushner 1990   25  0.6822  0.0021  0.1023  0.298  0.623  0.42
Levy 1951   22  0.6930  0.0014  0.1115  0.4142  0.0615  0.16
Luisada 1990   9  0.7215  0.0012  0.1513  0.4634  0.0911  0.20
Lushtak 2004   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Lympany 1968   35  0.6613  0.0133  0.0639  0.0620  0.2424  0.12
Magaloff 1977   39  0.6629  0.0041  0.0933  0.0943  0.0738  0.08
Magaloff 1977b   41  0.6525  0.0040  0.0735  0.0738  0.0741  0.07
Magin 1975   20  0.6921  0.0039  0.0734  0.0743  0.0642  0.06
Milkina 1970   21  0.6957  0.0029  0.0630  0.1638  0.0632  0.10
Mohovich 1999   28  0.6761  0.0031  0.0731  0.1539  0.0636  0.09
Nadelmann 1956   34  0.6642  0.0042  0.0736  0.0763  0.0350  0.05
Ohlsson 1999   56  0.5663  0.0061  0.0558  0.0558  0.0460  0.04
Olejniczac 1990   19  0.6964  0.0020  0.0917  0.3662  0.0426  0.12
Olejniczak 1991   23  0.697  0.0319  0.0816  0.3740  0.0716  0.16
Osinska 1989   5  0.742  0.096  0.244  0.6531  0.185  0.34
Paderewski 1912   60  0.5334  0.0057  0.0556  0.0562  0.0363  0.04
Perahia 1994   36  0.6614  0.0116  0.0920  0.3313  0.347  0.33
Perlemuter 1986   51  0.6165  0.0054  0.0548  0.0536  0.0939  0.07
Poblocka 1999   14  0.7012  0.0113  0.1012  0.4657  0.0518  0.15
Rangell 2001   45  0.6328  0.0050  0.0557  0.0558  0.0557  0.05
Risler 1920   62  0.5046  0.0059  0.0363  0.0335  0.0847  0.05
Rosen 1989   43  0.6541  0.0043  0.0552  0.0532  0.1140  0.07
Rubinstein 1939   55  0.5838  0.0056  0.0459  0.0463  0.0365  0.03
Rubinstein 1952   27  0.6724  0.0025  0.0725  0.2739  0.0622  0.13
Rubinstein 1966   31  0.6727  0.0036  0.0642  0.0647  0.0551  0.05
Rummel 1943   58  0.5459  0.0060  0.0462  0.0456  0.0464  0.04
Shebanova 2002   12  0.719  0.017  0.206  0.6212  0.471  0.54
Smith 1975   29  0.6747  0.0026  0.0826  0.2451  0.0528  0.11
Szpilman 1948   54  0.5952  0.0052  0.0460  0.0460  0.0459  0.04
Uninsky 1971   46  0.6340  0.0045  0.0549  0.0558  0.0461  0.04
Wasowski 1980   6  0.733  0.063  0.195  0.6435  0.099  0.24
Weissenberg 1971   10  0.7211  0.0110  0.1911  0.4744  0.0614  0.17
Average   1  0.801  0.571  0.561  0.8451  0.0510  0.20
Random 1    65  0.0254  0.0065  0.0265  0.0211  0.4931  0.10
Random 2   64  0.0355  0.0064  0.0264  0.027  0.3834  0.09
Random 3   66  -0.0366  0.0066  0.0166  0.0130  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).