Random 2

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   57  0.0027  0.0029  0.0429  0.1164  0.0325  0.06
Ashkenazy 1981   31  0.0158  0.0045  0.0437  0.0464  0.0346  0.03
Beliavsky 2004   45  0.0056  0.0032  0.0432  0.0765  0.0232  0.04
BenOr 1989   56  0.0043  0.0052  0.0444  0.0464  0.0348  0.03
Biret 1990   8  0.045  0.059  0.089  0.3664  0.039  0.10
Blet 2003   26  0.0235  0.0017  0.0911  0.3064  0.0314  0.09
Block 1995   13  0.0428  0.0011  0.068  0.3664  0.038  0.10
Brailowsky 1960   53  0.0026  0.0027  0.0524  0.1364  0.0229  0.05
Chiu 1999   33  0.0148  0.0038  0.0435  0.0466  0.0152  0.02
Clidat 1994   35  0.0138  0.0036  0.0351  0.0365  0.0259  0.02
Cohen 1997   64  -0.0250  0.0063  0.0264  0.0265  0.0263  0.02
Coop 1987   34  0.0163  0.0055  0.0355  0.0364  0.0256  0.02
Cortot 1951   44  0.0020  0.0160  0.0358  0.0366  0.0164  0.02
Czerny 1949   49  0.0010  0.0241  0.0446  0.0464  0.0342  0.03
Czerny 1949b   48  0.0013  0.0224  0.0525  0.1264  0.0323  0.06
Ezaki 2006   43  0.0025  0.0151  0.0438  0.0465  0.0334  0.03
Falvay 1989   29  0.0162  0.0042  0.0348  0.0365  0.0253  0.02
Ferenczy 1958   65  -0.0460  0.0061  0.0262  0.0264  0.0258  0.02
Fiorentino 1962   11  0.0431  0.0021  0.0618  0.2265  0.0221  0.07
Fliere 1977   6  0.0446  0.0023  0.0621  0.1964  0.0222  0.06
Fou 1978   24  0.0234  0.0047  0.0352  0.0364  0.0339  0.03
Francois 1956   63  -0.0255  0.0016  0.0620  0.2065  0.0227  0.06
Hatto 1997   22  0.0249  0.0018  0.1014  0.2764  0.0315  0.09
Horowitz 1971   1  0.071  0.181  0.173  0.4864  0.034  0.12
Horowitz 1985   3  0.0429  0.0013  0.0713  0.2863  0.0310  0.09
Indjic 2001   42  0.0064  0.0030  0.0526  0.1164  0.0230  0.05
Kapell 1951   27  0.0221  0.0153  0.0353  0.0364  0.0255  0.02
Kiepura 1999   60  -0.0165  0.0062  0.0263  0.0266  0.0166  0.01
Kilenyi 1937   28  0.0233  0.0034  0.0350  0.0364  0.0341  0.03
Kissin 1993   12  0.0423  0.0119  0.0616  0.2564  0.0313  0.09
Kitain 1937   32  0.0116  0.0140  0.0441  0.0464  0.0347  0.03
Kushner 1990   52  0.0019  0.0137  0.0436  0.0464  0.0340  0.03
Levy 1951   18  0.0317  0.0110  0.0715  0.2664  0.0311  0.09
Luisada 1990   14  0.043  0.123  0.161  0.5064  0.033  0.12
Lushtak 2004   17  0.0311  0.0212  0.077  0.3864  0.0216  0.09
Lympany 1968   46  0.0022  0.0135  0.0349  0.0364  0.0250  0.02
Magaloff 1977   38  0.0157  0.0049  0.0440  0.0464  0.0343  0.03
Magaloff 1977b   39  0.0140  0.0048  0.0354  0.0364  0.0345  0.03
Magin 1975   41  0.0047  0.0054  0.0439  0.0464  0.0337  0.03
Milkina 1970   16  0.0314  0.015  0.174  0.4563  0.032  0.12
Mohovich 1999   62  -0.0141  0.0056  0.0356  0.0365  0.0262  0.02
Nadelmann 1956   59  -0.018  0.048  0.0922  0.1965  0.0224  0.06
Ohlsson 1999   9  0.046  0.054  0.165  0.4464  0.0212  0.09
Olejniczac 1990   19  0.0342  0.0033  0.0447  0.0465  0.0244  0.03
Olejniczak 1991   40  0.0137  0.0039  0.0434  0.0464  0.0336  0.03
Osinska 1989   51  0.0030  0.0059  0.0260  0.0265  0.0351  0.02
Paderewski 1912   61  -0.0145  0.0064  0.0265  0.0264  0.0260  0.02
Perahia 1994   50  0.0036  0.0014  0.0617  0.2462  0.0318  0.08
Perlemuter 1986   5  0.042  0.172  0.192  0.4964  0.027  0.10
Poblocka 1999   21  0.0251  0.0025  0.0623  0.1664  0.0319  0.07
Rangell 2001   36  0.0153  0.0050  0.0442  0.0464  0.0349  0.03
Risler 1920   15  0.034  0.116  0.1512  0.3064  0.0217  0.08
Rosen 1989   55  0.0044  0.0058  0.0259  0.0265  0.0261  0.02
Rubinstein 1939   20  0.0252  0.0031  0.0531  0.1064  0.0231  0.04
Rubinstein 1952   54  0.0059  0.0065  0.0261  0.0265  0.0265  0.02
Rubinstein 1966   58  -0.0161  0.0057  0.0357  0.0365  0.0257  0.02
Rummel 1943   37  0.0112  0.0228  0.0528  0.1164  0.0326  0.06
Shebanova 2002   10  0.0415  0.017  0.136  0.4164  0.035  0.11
Smith 1975   47  0.0039  0.0046  0.0445  0.0464  0.0335  0.03
Szpilman 1948   7  0.049  0.0226  0.0630  0.1064  0.0328  0.05
Uninsky 1971   4  0.0424  0.0122  0.0719  0.2264  0.0220  0.07
Wasowski 1980   25  0.0232  0.0015  0.0710  0.3264  0.036  0.10
Weissenberg 1971   23  0.0254  0.0043  0.0443  0.0463  0.0338  0.03
Average   30  0.0166  0.0044  0.0533  0.0564  0.0333  0.04
Random 1    66  -0.0518  0.0166  0.0166  0.0156  0.0354  0.02
Random 2   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Random 3   2  0.077  0.0420  0.0627  0.1110  0.461  0.22

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).