Perahia 1994

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   25  0.6231  0.0035  0.0640  0.0640  0.0637  0.06
Ashkenazy 1981   17  0.6338  0.0024  0.0621  0.1856  0.0529  0.09
Beliavsky 2004   47  0.5852  0.0043  0.0460  0.0456  0.0456  0.04
BenOr 1989   4  0.6829  0.0019  0.0914  0.3461  0.0326  0.10
Biret 1990   28  0.6153  0.0016  0.0718  0.2455  0.0523  0.11
Blet 2003   11  0.6519  0.0120  0.1112  0.3531  0.129  0.20
Block 1995   38  0.6023  0.0136  0.0633  0.0661  0.0445  0.05
Brailowsky 1960   55  0.5641  0.0039  0.0453  0.0455  0.0452  0.04
Chiu 1999   36  0.6016  0.0137  0.0637  0.0657  0.0441  0.05
Clidat 1994   57  0.5449  0.0051  0.0454  0.0460  0.0459  0.04
Cohen 1997   52  0.5756  0.0045  0.0638  0.0660  0.0447  0.05
Coop 1987   41  0.5936  0.0025  0.0627  0.1347  0.0627  0.09
Cortot 1951   42  0.5957  0.0048  0.0458  0.0455  0.0461  0.04
Czerny 1949   53  0.5733  0.0057  0.0635  0.0635  0.1132  0.08
Czerny 1949b   58  0.5447  0.0058  0.0364  0.0358  0.0553  0.04
Ezaki 2006   34  0.6034  0.0052  0.0548  0.0547  0.0736  0.06
Falvay 1989   10  0.6620  0.0115  0.0710  0.3836  0.0718  0.16
Ferenczy 1958   8  0.6615  0.0126  0.0625  0.1527  0.2314  0.19
Fiorentino 1962   27  0.6217  0.0111  0.1215  0.3338  0.0721  0.15
Fliere 1977   37  0.6043  0.0032  0.0532  0.0963  0.0339  0.05
Fou 1978   51  0.5755  0.0049  0.0547  0.0558  0.0454  0.04
Francois 1956   29  0.614  0.0512  0.0724  0.1612  0.535  0.29
Hatto 1997   21  0.6232  0.0023  0.0726  0.1438  0.0725  0.10
Horowitz 1971   13  0.649  0.0221  0.0717  0.2630  0.1611  0.20
Horowitz 1985   54  0.5718  0.0138  0.0451  0.0429  0.1630  0.08
Indjic 2001   14  0.6448  0.0018  0.0816  0.3239  0.0720  0.15
Kapell 1951   56  0.5654  0.0056  0.0545  0.0563  0.0355  0.04
Kiepura 1999   12  0.6535  0.0027  0.0722  0.1727  0.237  0.20
Kilenyi 1937   31  0.6145  0.0029  0.0628  0.1353  0.0531  0.08
Kissin 1993   24  0.627  0.034  0.155  0.4538  0.0813  0.19
Kitain 1937   63  0.3642  0.0063  0.0641  0.0657  0.0448  0.05
Kushner 1990   26  0.6214  0.0128  0.0629  0.1320  0.328  0.20
Levy 1951   35  0.6040  0.0034  0.0634  0.0659  0.0442  0.05
Luisada 1990   32  0.6150  0.0053  0.0639  0.0648  0.0638  0.06
Lushtak 2004   9  0.6621  0.0117  0.0813  0.3420  0.334  0.33
Lympany 1968   49  0.5839  0.0047  0.0455  0.0454  0.0451  0.04
Magaloff 1977   43  0.5960  0.0042  0.0459  0.0462  0.0458  0.04
Magaloff 1977b   39  0.6027  0.0041  0.0549  0.0559  0.0546  0.05
Magin 1975   30  0.6112  0.0154  0.0544  0.0549  0.0644  0.05
Milkina 1970   7  0.662  0.133  0.213  0.5218  0.253  0.36
Mohovich 1999   2  0.723  0.092  0.302  0.6623  0.331  0.47
Nadelmann 1956   33  0.6044  0.0046  0.0457  0.0462  0.0364  0.03
Ohlsson 1999   44  0.5962  0.0050  0.0546  0.0530  0.1728  0.09
Olejniczac 1990   18  0.638  0.0210  0.109  0.3939  0.0717  0.17
Olejniczak 1991   19  0.636  0.039  0.0919  0.2433  0.1216  0.17
Osinska 1989   3  0.6824  0.0114  0.087  0.4338  0.0812  0.19
Paderewski 1912   59  0.5159  0.0059  0.0363  0.0363  0.0365  0.03
Perahia 1994   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Perlemuter 1986   46  0.5810  0.0222  0.0723  0.1619  0.396  0.25
Poblocka 1999   22  0.6228  0.0031  0.0531  0.1060  0.0534  0.07
Rangell 2001   50  0.5822  0.0155  0.0542  0.0547  0.0649  0.05
Risler 1920   62  0.4663  0.0061  0.0550  0.0550  0.0640  0.05
Rosen 1989   48  0.5858  0.0044  0.0452  0.0452  0.0560  0.04
Rubinstein 1939   60  0.5137  0.0062  0.0636  0.0657  0.0443  0.05
Rubinstein 1952   20  0.6225  0.0033  0.0543  0.0552  0.0550  0.05
Rubinstein 1966   16  0.6426  0.008  0.1011  0.3640  0.0522  0.13
Rummel 1943   45  0.5851  0.0030  0.0630  0.1150  0.0535  0.07
Shebanova 2002   15  0.645  0.045  0.124  0.4718  0.332  0.39
Smith 1975   6  0.6746  0.007  0.118  0.4045  0.0619  0.15
Szpilman 1948   61  0.4961  0.0060  0.0361  0.0362  0.0462  0.03
Uninsky 1971   40  0.6030  0.0040  0.0456  0.0459  0.0457  0.04
Wasowski 1980   5  0.6713  0.016  0.106  0.4442  0.0715  0.18
Weissenberg 1971   23  0.6211  0.0113  0.0720  0.1953  0.0524  0.10
Average   1  0.741  0.421  0.411  0.7856  0.0510  0.20
Random 1    65  -0.0164  0.0065  0.0265  0.0237  0.0563  0.03
Random 2   64  0.0065  0.0064  0.0362  0.0317  0.2433  0.08
Random 3   66  -0.0366  0.0066  0.0166  0.0141  0.0566  0.02

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).