Olejniczak 1990

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   55  0.6659  0.008  0.0818  0.3631  0.1719  0.25
Ax 1995   49  0.6853  0.0038  0.0738  0.0720  0.2730  0.14
Bacha 1998   51  0.6848  0.0048  0.0552  0.0552  0.0461  0.04
Barbosa 1983   58  0.6314  0.0134  0.0833  0.0830  0.1437  0.11
BenOr 1989   1  0.832  0.192  0.241  0.731  0.711  0.72
Biret 1990   8  0.8022  0.0115  0.1612  0.5025  0.2315  0.34
Brailowsky 1960   60  0.6127  0.0062  0.0643  0.0656  0.0455  0.05
Chiu 1999   25  0.7657  0.0027  0.0826  0.2212  0.3318  0.27
Clidat 1994   54  0.6723  0.0142  0.0551  0.0535  0.0947  0.07
Cohen 1997   59  0.6228  0.0052  0.0460  0.049  0.5328  0.15
Cortot 1951   53  0.6755  0.0061  0.0641  0.0638  0.0559  0.05
Csalog 1996   9  0.7916  0.0111  0.135  0.5710  0.483  0.52
Czerny 1989   44  0.7138  0.0035  0.0737  0.0732  0.1541  0.10
Ezaki 2006   38  0.7258  0.0053  0.0456  0.0432  0.1048  0.06
Falvay 1989   12  0.787  0.0329  0.0632  0.1851  0.0443  0.08
Fiorentino 1962   3  0.818  0.0316  0.1116  0.4311  0.5010  0.46
Fliere 1977   5  0.8010  0.0318  0.1414  0.4618  0.3713  0.41
Fou 1978   22  0.771  0.241  0.233  0.641  0.622  0.63
Francois 1956   61  0.5960  0.0063  0.0549  0.0555  0.0464  0.04
Goldenweiser 1946   52  0.6840  0.0036  0.0642  0.0627  0.1739  0.10
Gornostaeva 1994   41  0.7134  0.0033  0.0735  0.0714  0.4724  0.18
Groot 1988   2  0.823  0.123  0.232  0.6617  0.395  0.51
Hatto 1993   19  0.7735  0.0022  0.1222  0.3039  0.0829  0.15
Hatto 1997   23  0.7613  0.0221  0.1223  0.3051  0.0631  0.13
Horszowski 1983   33  0.7311  0.026  0.1910  0.505  0.516  0.50
Indjic 2001   13  0.786  0.0420  0.0821  0.3332  0.1620  0.23
Katin 1996   15  0.7843  0.0030  0.0829  0.2040  0.0734  0.12
Kiepura 1999   62  0.5936  0.0057  0.0463  0.0434  0.0754  0.05
Korecka 1992   47  0.6941  0.0060  0.0546  0.0550  0.0556  0.05
Kushner 1990   57  0.6345  0.0045  0.0458  0.0429  0.1545  0.08
Lilamand 2001   48  0.6949  0.0041  0.0640  0.0611  0.4127  0.16
Luisada 1990   21  0.774  0.065  0.144  0.6124  0.2912  0.42
Luisada 2008   26  0.7518  0.0124  0.0919  0.3537  0.0923  0.18
Lushtak 2004   6  0.8012  0.024  0.147  0.5110  0.534  0.52
Malcuzynski 1951   63  0.5629  0.0049  0.0457  0.0449  0.0563  0.04
Malcuzynski 1961   37  0.7220  0.019  0.0917  0.4341  0.0725  0.17
Magaloff 1977   20  0.7717  0.0123  0.0924  0.2924  0.2917  0.29
Magin 1975   31  0.7433  0.0025  0.0927  0.2240  0.0636  0.11
Meguri 1997   17  0.7850  0.0026  0.0728  0.226  0.5814  0.36
Milkina 1970   36  0.7239  0.0054  0.0544  0.0533  0.0750  0.06
Mohovich 1999   11  0.789  0.037  0.118  0.5110  0.507  0.50
Nezu 2005   14  0.785  0.0413  0.149  0.5114  0.439  0.47
Ohlsson 1999   35  0.7261  0.0047  0.0547  0.0547  0.0558  0.05
Olejniczak 1990   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Osinska 1989   7  0.8025  0.0012  0.136  0.5436  0.0821  0.21
Perlemuter 1992   45  0.7021  0.0159  0.0462  0.0421  0.2242  0.09
Poblocka 1999   18  0.7847  0.0032  0.1030  0.1936  0.0733  0.12
Rangell 2001   40  0.7132  0.0055  0.0553  0.0518  0.3432  0.13
Richter 1960   39  0.7142  0.0050  0.0455  0.0438  0.0562  0.04
Richter 1961   50  0.6815  0.0143  0.0545  0.0530  0.1940  0.10
Rosen 1989   10  0.7919  0.0110  0.0913  0.4810  0.508  0.49
Rubinstein 1939   46  0.6946  0.0044  0.0459  0.0448  0.0560  0.04
Rubinstein 1952   43  0.7164  0.0037  0.0834  0.0854  0.0553  0.06
Rubinstein 1966   16  0.7831  0.0014  0.1211  0.5050  0.0526  0.16
Rudanovskaya 2007   28  0.7537  0.0056  0.0454  0.0417  0.3138  0.11
Shebanova 2002   24  0.7663  0.0031  0.0825  0.2354  0.0635  0.12
Smith 1975   34  0.7352  0.0051  0.0550  0.0534  0.0749  0.06
Sztompka 1959   29  0.7454  0.0046  0.0461  0.0429  0.1644  0.08
Tanyel 1992   27  0.7530  0.0019  0.0820  0.3313  0.6011  0.44
Tsujii 2005   4  0.8124  0.0017  0.1115  0.4329  0.2316  0.31
Uninsky 1959   30  0.7462  0.0040  0.0736  0.0746  0.0651  0.06
Vardi 1988   56  0.6366  0.0058  0.0548  0.0545  0.0557  0.05
Wasowski 1980   42  0.7144  0.0028  0.0731  0.1931  0.2022  0.19
Zimerman 1975   32  0.7426  0.0039  0.0739  0.0742  0.0552  0.06
Random 1   66  0.0051  0.0066  0.0166  0.0143  0.0365  0.02
Random 2   64  0.0556  0.0065  0.0265  0.0210  0.3546  0.08
Random 3   65  0.0165  0.0064  0.0264  0.0251  0.0366  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).