Nadelmann 1956

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   21  0.7228  0.0026  0.0830  0.1612  0.3616  0.24
Ashkenazy 1981   16  0.7214  0.017  0.1510  0.4336  0.0921  0.20
Beliavsky 2004   29  0.6927  0.0013  0.0827  0.2034  0.0933  0.13
BenOr 1989   2  0.792  0.082  0.332  0.7618  0.491  0.61
Biret 1990   12  0.7416  0.0115  0.0715  0.3844  0.0631  0.15
Blet 2003   7  0.7410  0.0111  0.1411  0.4210  0.497  0.45
Block 1995   43  0.6636  0.0036  0.0639  0.0649  0.0560  0.05
Brailowsky 1960   36  0.6740  0.0044  0.0646  0.0628  0.2138  0.11
Chiu 1999   26  0.7017  0.0024  0.0924  0.2341  0.0636  0.12
Clidat 1994   33  0.6825  0.0042  0.0638  0.0627  0.1843  0.10
Cohen 1997   24  0.7030  0.0047  0.0548  0.0540  0.0661  0.05
Coop 1987   53  0.6266  0.0058  0.0456  0.0458  0.0562  0.04
Cortot 1951   27  0.6951  0.0038  0.0737  0.0730  0.1344  0.10
Czerny 1949   37  0.6764  0.0043  0.0640  0.0633  0.1245  0.08
Czerny 1949b   46  0.6626  0.0030  0.0531  0.1527  0.2523  0.19
Ezaki 2006   18  0.7255  0.0027  0.1029  0.1736  0.0935  0.12
Falvay 1989   13  0.7312  0.0117  0.0616  0.3731  0.1515  0.24
Ferenczy 1958   57  0.5860  0.0061  0.0454  0.0444  0.0564  0.04
Fiorentino 1962   4  0.7811  0.014  0.304  0.6420  0.472  0.55
Fliere 1977   8  0.7423  0.009  0.186  0.5414  0.503  0.52
Fou 1978   23  0.704  0.036  0.177  0.5025  0.289  0.37
Francois 1956   62  0.525  0.0263  0.0645  0.0619  0.4228  0.16
Hatto 1997   31  0.6818  0.0034  0.0644  0.0627  0.2240  0.11
Horowitz 1971   52  0.6246  0.0049  0.0452  0.0431  0.1546  0.08
Horowitz 1985   60  0.5537  0.0056  0.0453  0.0439  0.0753  0.05
Indjic 2001   19  0.7233  0.0028  0.0825  0.2225  0.2517  0.23
Kapell 1951   6  0.753  0.033  0.193  0.6922  0.374  0.51
Kiepura 1999   44  0.6621  0.0051  0.0458  0.0433  0.0752  0.05
Kilenyi 1937   40  0.6743  0.0035  0.0641  0.0639  0.0847  0.07
Kissin 1993   51  0.6262  0.0041  0.0736  0.0762  0.0457  0.05
Kitain 1937   61  0.5354  0.0057  0.0450  0.0414  0.4434  0.13
Kushner 1990   50  0.6345  0.0045  0.0642  0.0626  0.2437  0.12
Levy 1951   30  0.6931  0.0022  0.0823  0.2538  0.0732  0.13
Luisada 1990   9  0.747  0.0114  0.0719  0.3229  0.2912  0.30
Lushtak 2004   45  0.6647  0.0053  0.0363  0.0336  0.0759  0.05
Lympany 1968   28  0.6957  0.0039  0.0933  0.0912  0.4918  0.21
Magaloff 1977   32  0.6824  0.0025  0.1121  0.2933  0.1027  0.17
Magaloff 1977b   42  0.6632  0.0033  0.0735  0.0744  0.0650  0.06
Magin 1975   5  0.7615  0.0112  0.1212  0.4126  0.496  0.45
Milkina 1970   34  0.6819  0.0050  0.0455  0.0435  0.0756  0.05
Mohovich 1999   11  0.7420  0.008  0.149  0.4820  0.408  0.44
Nadelmann 1956   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Ohlsson 1999   56  0.5953  0.0059  0.0459  0.0449  0.0563  0.04
Olejniczac 1990   3  0.7913  0.015  0.385  0.6325  0.335  0.46
Olejniczak 1991   15  0.7341  0.0018  0.0714  0.3832  0.2013  0.28
Osinska 1989   14  0.7342  0.0020  0.0817  0.3539  0.0826  0.17
Paderewski 1912   59  0.5544  0.0055  0.0457  0.0444  0.0565  0.04
Perahia 1994   55  0.6039  0.0060  0.0362  0.0357  0.0466  0.03
Perlemuter 1986   48  0.639  0.0152  0.0361  0.0320  0.3739  0.11
Poblocka 1999   17  0.7238  0.0019  0.0813  0.3937  0.0922  0.19
Rangell 2001   20  0.726  0.0223  0.0822  0.2936  0.0830  0.15
Risler 1920   63  0.5059  0.0062  0.0451  0.0434  0.0948  0.06
Rosen 1989   47  0.6422  0.0054  0.0460  0.0421  0.3041  0.11
Rubinstein 1939   38  0.6749  0.0029  0.0626  0.216  0.5711  0.35
Rubinstein 1952   41  0.6734  0.0031  0.0728  0.1724  0.2620  0.21
Rubinstein 1966   39  0.678  0.0132  0.0732  0.1421  0.3119  0.21
Rummel 1943   54  0.6252  0.0040  0.0934  0.0915  0.3525  0.18
Shebanova 2002   49  0.6350  0.0046  0.0547  0.0547  0.0558  0.05
Smith 1975   35  0.6756  0.0037  0.0643  0.0650  0.0555  0.05
Szpilman 1948   58  0.5763  0.0048  0.0449  0.0442  0.0654  0.05
Uninsky 1971   22  0.7029  0.0016  0.0618  0.3429  0.2114  0.27
Wasowski 1980   25  0.7048  0.0021  0.0720  0.3140  0.0729  0.15
Weissenberg 1971   10  0.7435  0.0010  0.148  0.5041  0.0724  0.19
Average   1  0.821  0.671  0.661  0.8432  0.1610  0.37
Random 1    64  0.0365  0.0064  0.0264  0.0212  0.4842  0.10
Random 2   66  -0.0158  0.0065  0.0265  0.0222  0.1949  0.06
Random 3   65  0.0061  0.0066  0.0166  0.0115  0.3351  0.06
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).