Francois 1956

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   46  0.5960  0.0041  0.0736  0.0759  0.0444  0.05
Ax 1995   28  0.624  0.076  0.097  0.4031  0.135  0.23
Bacha 1998   32  0.6214  0.0124  0.0624  0.2158  0.0425  0.09
Barbosa 1983   62  0.4844  0.0039  0.0738  0.0752  0.0536  0.06
BenOr 1989   58  0.5358  0.0061  0.0359  0.0359  0.0465  0.03
Biret 1990   19  0.6556  0.0031  0.0531  0.1464  0.0338  0.06
Brailowsky 1960   14  0.671  0.191  0.191  0.5020  0.311  0.39
Chiu 1999   49  0.5819  0.0147  0.0545  0.0563  0.0346  0.04
Clidat 1994   40  0.6017  0.0129  0.0726  0.1853  0.0430  0.08
Cohen 1997   63  0.4746  0.0058  0.0361  0.0359  0.0464  0.03
Cortot 1951   26  0.6322  0.0117  0.1018  0.3116  0.302  0.30
Csalog 1996   41  0.6028  0.0146  0.0546  0.0562  0.0448  0.04
Czerny 1989   31  0.6215  0.0114  0.0914  0.3353  0.0418  0.11
Ezaki 2006   33  0.6210  0.0234  0.0739  0.0737  0.0732  0.07
Falvay 1989   35  0.6148  0.0035  0.0640  0.0647  0.0540  0.05
Fiorentino 1962   38  0.6153  0.0050  0.0454  0.0454  0.0456  0.04
Fliere 1977   4  0.698  0.0420  0.0922  0.2354  0.0517  0.11
Fou 1978   56  0.5435  0.0044  0.0544  0.0554  0.0541  0.05
Francois 1956   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Goldenweiser 1946   36  0.6120  0.0115  0.1020  0.2733  0.0713  0.14
Gornostaeva 1994   39  0.6139  0.0038  0.0834  0.0850  0.0537  0.06
Groot 1988   15  0.6663  0.0030  0.0630  0.1564  0.0334  0.07
Hatto 1993   47  0.5940  0.0054  0.0449  0.0456  0.0558  0.04
Hatto 1997   48  0.5847  0.0052  0.0453  0.0458  0.0450  0.04
Horszowski 1983   61  0.4961  0.0053  0.0356  0.0364  0.0360  0.03
Indjic 2001   51  0.5731  0.0055  0.0360  0.0356  0.0554  0.04
Katin 1996   37  0.6126  0.0149  0.0450  0.0453  0.0547  0.04
Kiepura 1999   55  0.5545  0.0037  0.0737  0.0755  0.0439  0.05
Korecka 1992   24  0.6355  0.0023  0.0621  0.2741  0.0714  0.14
Kushner 1990   53  0.5634  0.0027  0.0828  0.1860  0.0429  0.08
Lilamand 2001   60  0.5116  0.0160  0.0364  0.0354  0.0549  0.04
Luisada 1990   9  0.6824  0.0110  0.0712  0.3562  0.0323  0.10
Luisada 2008   13  0.689  0.037  0.095  0.4553  0.0511  0.15
Lushtak 2004   45  0.5966  0.0056  0.0358  0.0349  0.0552  0.04
Malcuzynski 1951   23  0.633  0.133  0.1310  0.3620  0.223  0.28
Malcuzynski 1961   44  0.5933  0.0025  0.0623  0.2160  0.0521  0.10
Magaloff 1977   12  0.6812  0.0218  0.0813  0.3456  0.0515  0.13
Magin 1975   11  0.6827  0.0111  0.098  0.3858  0.0416  0.12
Meguri 1997   59  0.5362  0.0063  0.0362  0.0364  0.0361  0.03
Milkina 1970   16  0.662  0.142  0.133  0.4839  0.067  0.17
Mohovich 1999   25  0.6350  0.0040  0.0835  0.0863  0.0343  0.05
Nezu 2005   18  0.6521  0.0122  0.0616  0.3260  0.0419  0.11
Ohlsson 1999   1  0.716  0.055  0.142  0.5048  0.058  0.16
Olejniczak 1990   43  0.5954  0.0057  0.0455  0.0449  0.0559  0.04
Osinska 1989   3  0.6938  0.0013  0.0717  0.3260  0.0320  0.10
Perlemuter 1992   10  0.6842  0.0019  0.0819  0.2919  0.254  0.27
Poblocka 1999   5  0.6911  0.028  0.084  0.4845  0.066  0.17
Rangell 2001   42  0.6029  0.0043  0.0543  0.0547  0.0545  0.05
Richter 1960   2  0.7013  0.0212  0.129  0.3835  0.0610  0.15
Richter 1961   29  0.6232  0.0033  0.0641  0.0632  0.1227  0.08
Rosen 1989   34  0.6152  0.0048  0.0448  0.0460  0.0453  0.04
Rubinstein 1939   8  0.695  0.074  0.176  0.4354  0.059  0.15
Rubinstein 1952   17  0.6518  0.0116  0.1315  0.3339  0.0712  0.15
Rubinstein 1966   7  0.6936  0.009  0.0711  0.3564  0.0322  0.10
Rudanovskaya 2007   27  0.6330  0.0045  0.0547  0.0547  0.0542  0.05
Shebanova 2002   50  0.5825  0.0151  0.0452  0.0462  0.0451  0.04
Smith 1975   20  0.6437  0.0042  0.0933  0.0933  0.0828  0.08
Sztompka 1959   22  0.6423  0.0132  0.0632  0.1139  0.0726  0.09
Tanyel 1992   54  0.5664  0.0059  0.0363  0.0363  0.0362  0.03
Tsujii 2005   6  0.6951  0.0028  0.0827  0.1852  0.0431  0.08
Uninsky 1959   30  0.627  0.0421  0.0629  0.1563  0.0333  0.07
Vardi 1988   52  0.5741  0.0036  0.0642  0.0637  0.0735  0.06
Wasowski 1980   21  0.6457  0.0026  0.0625  0.1957  0.0424  0.09
Zimerman 1975   57  0.5465  0.0062  0.0451  0.0448  0.0457  0.04
Random 1   65  -0.0249  0.0065  0.0265  0.0235  0.0463  0.03
Random 2   66  -0.0443  0.0066  0.0166  0.0162  0.0266  0.01
Random 3   64  0.0759  0.0064  0.0357  0.0337  0.0555  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).