Kushner 1990

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   55  0.5740  0.0032  0.0731  0.1450  0.0540  0.08
Ax 1995   49  0.5937  0.0031  0.0830  0.1529  0.1624  0.15
Bacha 1998   22  0.6518  0.0119  0.1018  0.3326  0.2512  0.29
Barbosa 1983   48  0.6048  0.0026  0.0724  0.2625  0.2815  0.27
BenOr 1989   12  0.692  0.117  0.2012  0.5426  0.298  0.40
Biret 1990   17  0.6751  0.0021  0.0916  0.4250  0.0525  0.14
Brailowsky 1960   42  0.6153  0.0044  0.0452  0.0430  0.1537  0.08
Chiu 1999   54  0.5829  0.0040  0.0736  0.0741  0.0647  0.06
Clidat 1994   46  0.6032  0.0033  0.0934  0.0934  0.1036  0.09
Cohen 1997   62  0.4852  0.0062  0.0547  0.0529  0.2134  0.10
Cortot 1951   50  0.5947  0.0049  0.0459  0.0418  0.2831  0.11
Csalog 1996   43  0.6159  0.0050  0.0546  0.0542  0.0749  0.06
Czerny 1989   15  0.684  0.096  0.187  0.569  0.522  0.54
Ezaki 2006   37  0.6327  0.0039  0.0640  0.0629  0.1632  0.10
Falvay 1989   11  0.705  0.078  0.161  0.7126  0.237  0.40
Fiorentino 1962   40  0.6233  0.0045  0.0450  0.0449  0.0563  0.04
Fliere 1977   35  0.6346  0.0042  0.0643  0.0651  0.0553  0.05
Fou 1978   33  0.6331  0.0030  0.0728  0.1646  0.0633  0.10
Francois 1956   60  0.5641  0.0055  0.0460  0.0428  0.1843  0.08
Goldenweiser 1946   38  0.6256  0.0034  0.1033  0.1057  0.0446  0.06
Gornostaeva 1994   39  0.6235  0.0047  0.0448  0.0437  0.0756  0.05
Groot 1988   24  0.6539  0.0035  0.0737  0.0745  0.0652  0.06
Hatto 1993   30  0.6363  0.0038  0.0642  0.0635  0.0945  0.07
Hatto 1997   31  0.6345  0.0036  0.0639  0.0650  0.0650  0.06
Horszowski 1983   32  0.6313  0.0124  0.0625  0.2531  0.1818  0.21
Indjic 2001   34  0.6349  0.0037  0.0835  0.0841  0.0744  0.07
Katin 1996   20  0.6543  0.0041  0.0641  0.0646  0.0648  0.06
Kiepura 1999   61  0.5658  0.0060  0.0363  0.0362  0.0465  0.03
Korecka 1992   26  0.6454  0.0043  0.0638  0.0630  0.1435  0.09
Kushner 1990   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Lilamand 2001   57  0.5734  0.0052  0.0461  0.0444  0.0655  0.05
Luisada 1990   5  0.717  0.055  0.246  0.5831  0.1711  0.31
Luisada 2008   19  0.6619  0.0114  0.1514  0.5222  0.269  0.37
Lushtak 2004   21  0.6522  0.0122  0.0719  0.3229  0.1816  0.24
Malcuzynski 1951   27  0.6411  0.0225  0.0632  0.1330  0.1427  0.13
Malcuzynski 1961   9  0.7042  0.0011  0.128  0.5543  0.0622  0.18
Magaloff 1977   18  0.6736  0.0027  0.0720  0.3228  0.2713  0.29
Magin 1975   13  0.6955  0.0028  0.0826  0.2343  0.0628  0.12
Meguri 1997   52  0.5864  0.0058  0.0453  0.0449  0.0560  0.04
Milkina 1970   2  0.726  0.054  0.215  0.607  0.511  0.55
Mohovich 1999   25  0.6423  0.0020  0.0821  0.3032  0.1123  0.18
Nezu 2005   23  0.659  0.0216  0.1323  0.2842  0.0626  0.13
Ohlsson 1999   28  0.648  0.0417  0.1122  0.3030  0.1420  0.20
Olejniczak 1990   36  0.6310  0.0223  0.0729  0.1558  0.0442  0.08
Osinska 1989   1  0.741  0.291  0.292  0.6910  0.353  0.49
Perlemuter 1992   41  0.6150  0.0056  0.0456  0.0434  0.0654  0.05
Poblocka 1999   3  0.7121  0.0112  0.1111  0.5435  0.0819  0.21
Rangell 2001   56  0.5717  0.0157  0.0457  0.0429  0.1741  0.08
Richter 1960   45  0.6128  0.0046  0.0454  0.0439  0.0561  0.04
Richter 1961   63  0.4665  0.0063  0.0544  0.0553  0.0457  0.04
Rosen 1989   29  0.6460  0.0029  0.0627  0.1944  0.0629  0.11
Rubinstein 1939   10  0.7012  0.0110  0.1413  0.5425  0.315  0.41
Rubinstein 1952   7  0.703  0.112  0.213  0.6115  0.324  0.44
Rubinstein 1966   8  0.7015  0.013  0.154  0.6124  0.1910  0.34
Rudanovskaya 2007   58  0.5738  0.0059  0.0458  0.0427  0.1639  0.08
Shebanova 2002   14  0.6814  0.0113  0.1410  0.5535  0.0917  0.22
Smith 1975   51  0.5925  0.0053  0.0449  0.0431  0.1738  0.08
Sztompka 1959   44  0.6120  0.0154  0.0455  0.0447  0.0559  0.04
Tanyel 1992   53  0.5866  0.0061  0.0545  0.0555  0.0462  0.04
Tsujii 2005   4  0.7162  0.009  0.149  0.5520  0.316  0.41
Uninsky 1959   16  0.6830  0.0018  0.1015  0.4536  0.0721  0.18
Vardi 1988   47  0.6024  0.0051  0.0462  0.0444  0.0558  0.04
Wasowski 1980   6  0.7016  0.0115  0.1417  0.3730  0.2114  0.28
Zimerman 1975   59  0.5726  0.0048  0.0451  0.0457  0.0464  0.04
Random 1   66  0.0057  0.0065  0.0265  0.0220  0.2151  0.06
Random 2   65  0.0344  0.0066  0.0166  0.0132  0.1166  0.03
Random 3   64  0.1161  0.0064  0.0364  0.0311  0.4330  0.11

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).