Shebanova 2002

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   27  0.6813  0.0145  0.0553  0.0541  0.0651  0.05
Ashkenazy 1981   14  0.7139  0.0028  0.0526  0.1946  0.0630  0.11
Beliavsky 2004   54  0.5931  0.0041  0.0549  0.0561  0.0361  0.04
BenOr 1989   17  0.7146  0.0029  0.0628  0.1547  0.0631  0.09
Biret 1990   5  0.759  0.025  0.259  0.5345  0.0618  0.18
Blet 2003   32  0.6715  0.0040  0.0538  0.0532  0.1136  0.07
Block 1995   33  0.6735  0.0050  0.0636  0.0654  0.0452  0.05
Brailowsky 1960   49  0.6259  0.0057  0.0463  0.0454  0.0457  0.04
Chiu 1999   28  0.6819  0.0025  0.0625  0.2042  0.0627  0.11
Clidat 1994   59  0.5662  0.0061  0.0539  0.0553  0.0550  0.05
Cohen 1997   50  0.6242  0.0054  0.0459  0.0448  0.0564  0.04
Coop 1987   12  0.7232  0.0010  0.1310  0.5143  0.0717  0.19
Cortot 1951   26  0.6830  0.0037  0.0545  0.0535  0.0741  0.06
Czerny 1949   34  0.6627  0.0027  0.0529  0.1434  0.1224  0.13
Czerny 1949b   51  0.6150  0.0048  0.0460  0.0445  0.0646  0.05
Ezaki 2006   4  0.7610  0.028  0.245  0.6030  0.237  0.37
Falvay 1989   22  0.6947  0.0035  0.0542  0.0541  0.0644  0.05
Ferenczy 1958   55  0.5852  0.0052  0.0634  0.0646  0.0548  0.05
Fiorentino 1962   20  0.7040  0.0013  0.1613  0.4047  0.0620  0.15
Fliere 1977   31  0.6761  0.0038  0.0546  0.0548  0.0542  0.05
Fou 1978   36  0.6625  0.0046  0.0537  0.0553  0.0460  0.04
Francois 1956   61  0.5322  0.0059  0.0462  0.0413  0.5223  0.14
Hatto 1997   8  0.7411  0.029  0.177  0.5514  0.434  0.49
Horowitz 1971   58  0.5741  0.0060  0.0554  0.0554  0.0554  0.05
Horowitz 1985   62  0.4437  0.0062  0.0556  0.0555  0.0543  0.05
Indjic 2001   2  0.798  0.032  0.252  0.765  0.641  0.70
Kapell 1951   21  0.7026  0.0020  0.0823  0.2435  0.0821  0.14
Kiepura 1999   45  0.6323  0.0055  0.0461  0.0448  0.0556  0.04
Kilenyi 1937   46  0.6334  0.0043  0.0548  0.0545  0.0739  0.06
Kissin 1993   24  0.6856  0.0030  0.0927  0.1856  0.0434  0.08
Kitain 1937   63  0.3855  0.0063  0.0541  0.0563  0.0465  0.04
Kushner 1990   52  0.6121  0.0042  0.0540  0.0524  0.2528  0.11
Levy 1951   23  0.6933  0.0019  0.0719  0.2955  0.0525  0.12
Luisada 1990   11  0.7243  0.0016  0.0822  0.2552  0.0626  0.12
Lushtak 2004   15  0.7114  0.0112  0.1412  0.476  0.622  0.54
Lympany 1968   35  0.6620  0.0031  0.0630  0.1324  0.2219  0.17
Magaloff 1977   39  0.6660  0.0033  0.0551  0.0548  0.0649  0.05
Magaloff 1977b   37  0.6617  0.0034  0.0633  0.0645  0.0640  0.06
Magin 1975   29  0.6744  0.0044  0.0457  0.0462  0.0459  0.04
Milkina 1970   13  0.7148  0.0022  0.0814  0.3620  0.2411  0.29
Mohovich 1999   6  0.753  0.086  0.214  0.6219  0.413  0.50
Nadelmann 1956   44  0.6363  0.0039  0.0547  0.0547  0.0547  0.05
Ohlsson 1999   25  0.6816  0.0018  0.0820  0.2820  0.329  0.30
Olejniczac 1990   18  0.7038  0.0017  0.0815  0.3546  0.0622  0.14
Olejniczak 1991   47  0.6264  0.0049  0.0552  0.0549  0.0645  0.05
Osinska 1989   9  0.746  0.047  0.228  0.5332  0.178  0.30
Paderewski 1912   42  0.6453  0.0024  0.0921  0.2631  0.1515  0.20
Perahia 1994   43  0.645  0.0414  0.1318  0.334  0.476  0.39
Perlemuter 1986   16  0.717  0.0315  0.1316  0.334  0.615  0.45
Poblocka 1999   3  0.784  0.043  0.213  0.7134  0.1012  0.27
Rangell 2001   30  0.6749  0.0036  0.0543  0.0551  0.0655  0.05
Risler 1920   56  0.5854  0.0047  0.0635  0.0643  0.0737  0.06
Rosen 1989   53  0.6045  0.0053  0.0550  0.0541  0.0653  0.05
Rubinstein 1939   60  0.5457  0.0058  0.0555  0.0555  0.0458  0.04
Rubinstein 1952   40  0.6524  0.0051  0.0544  0.0559  0.0466  0.04
Rubinstein 1966   19  0.7029  0.0023  0.0717  0.3325  0.2710  0.30
Rummel 1943   57  0.5836  0.0056  0.0458  0.0448  0.0562  0.04
Shebanova 2002   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Smith 1975   38  0.6628  0.0026  0.0524  0.2063  0.0333  0.08
Szpilman 1948   41  0.6451  0.0032  0.0532  0.1038  0.0732  0.08
Uninsky 1971   48  0.6212  0.0221  0.0731  0.1247  0.0535  0.08
Wasowski 1980   10  0.7318  0.0011  0.1611  0.5038  0.0814  0.20
Weissenberg 1971   7  0.752  0.114  0.276  0.5947  0.0616  0.19
Average   1  0.811  0.461  0.461  0.8146  0.0613  0.22
Random 1    66  -0.0266  0.0065  0.0265  0.0229  0.2138  0.06
Random 2   64  0.0465  0.0064  0.0364  0.036  0.4129  0.11
Random 3   65  0.0158  0.0066  0.0166  0.0126  0.1763  0.04

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).