Perlemuter 1992

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   58  0.5560  0.0048  0.0544  0.0549  0.0544  0.05
Ax 1995   60  0.5450  0.0060  0.0363  0.0361  0.0365  0.03
Bacha 1998   44  0.6227  0.0036  0.0542  0.0543  0.0536  0.05
Barbosa 1983   62  0.5258  0.0032  0.0632  0.1158  0.0533  0.07
BenOr 1989   20  0.6834  0.0015  0.0715  0.2858  0.0420  0.11
Biret 1990   17  0.6818  0.0110  0.1117  0.2648  0.0521  0.11
Brailowsky 1960   55  0.5835  0.0054  0.0361  0.0342  0.0646  0.04
Chiu 1999   50  0.6036  0.0055  0.0364  0.0358  0.0462  0.03
Clidat 1994   54  0.5937  0.0050  0.0541  0.0563  0.0351  0.04
Cohen 1997   63  0.4855  0.0063  0.0449  0.0453  0.0455  0.04
Cortot 1951   33  0.6520  0.0140  0.0452  0.0427  0.1831  0.08
Csalog 1996   11  0.7024  0.0014  0.076  0.4058  0.058  0.14
Czerny 1989   56  0.5765  0.0056  0.0357  0.0360  0.0463  0.03
Ezaki 2006   53  0.5946  0.0058  0.0359  0.0357  0.0460  0.03
Falvay 1989   18  0.6866  0.0037  0.0633  0.0653  0.0435  0.05
Fiorentino 1962   8  0.719  0.0228  0.0527  0.1555  0.0430  0.08
Fliere 1977   1  0.7412  0.013  0.153  0.5053  0.056  0.16
Fou 1978   51  0.6025  0.0038  0.0446  0.0453  0.0548  0.04
Francois 1956   16  0.6817  0.0120  0.0719  0.2519  0.291  0.27
Goldenweiser 1946   43  0.6348  0.0021  0.0713  0.2847  0.0512  0.12
Gornostaeva 1994   52  0.5943  0.0057  0.0455  0.0449  0.0557  0.04
Groot 1988   3  0.743  0.084  0.182  0.6152  0.055  0.17
Hatto 1993   41  0.6432  0.0047  0.0543  0.0561  0.0459  0.04
Hatto 1997   45  0.6263  0.0039  0.0635  0.0659  0.0440  0.05
Horszowski 1983   48  0.6126  0.0018  0.0711  0.3040  0.069  0.13
Indjic 2001   37  0.6464  0.0046  0.0448  0.0460  0.0452  0.04
Katin 1996   7  0.7138  0.0029  0.0631  0.1355  0.0432  0.07
Kiepura 1999   57  0.5523  0.0062  0.0447  0.0457  0.0445  0.04
Korecka 1992   39  0.6428  0.0051  0.0545  0.0554  0.0537  0.05
Kushner 1990   49  0.6154  0.0033  0.0634  0.0656  0.0438  0.05
Lilamand 2001   36  0.6461  0.0024  0.0724  0.2039  0.0714  0.12
Luisada 1990   40  0.6456  0.0041  0.0540  0.0548  0.0541  0.05
Luisada 2008   31  0.6639  0.0019  0.079  0.3454  0.0511  0.13
Lushtak 2004   14  0.6915  0.0127  0.0625  0.1947  0.0522  0.10
Malcuzynski 1951   47  0.6245  0.0016  0.0723  0.2144  0.0523  0.10
Malcuzynski 1961   38  0.644  0.079  0.0920  0.2458  0.0519  0.11
Magaloff 1977   26  0.6729  0.0031  0.0630  0.1346  0.0528  0.08
Magin 1975   22  0.6859  0.0022  0.0618  0.2654  0.0518  0.11
Meguri 1997   42  0.6316  0.0144  0.0637  0.0650  0.0539  0.05
Milkina 1970   12  0.7047  0.0030  0.0629  0.1448  0.0526  0.08
Mohovich 1999   27  0.6741  0.0049  0.0451  0.0457  0.0453  0.04
Nezu 2005   29  0.6610  0.0225  0.0822  0.2164  0.0329  0.08
Ohlsson 1999   10  0.7011  0.017  0.105  0.4945  0.063  0.17
Olejniczak 1990   9  0.705  0.0612  0.0721  0.2262  0.0425  0.09
Osinska 1989   2  0.7433  0.0013  0.0812  0.2957  0.0416  0.11
Perlemuter 1992   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Poblocka 1999   34  0.6552  0.0052  0.0456  0.0460  0.0447  0.04
Rangell 2001   35  0.6549  0.0043  0.0454  0.0451  0.0558  0.04
Richter 1960   30  0.6619  0.0135  0.0539  0.0554  0.0450  0.04
Richter 1961   61  0.5314  0.0159  0.0360  0.0355  0.0461  0.03
Rosen 1989   21  0.6822  0.0034  0.0636  0.0658  0.0443  0.05
Rubinstein 1939   23  0.6751  0.006  0.1210  0.3161  0.0417  0.11
Rubinstein 1952   5  0.721  0.351  0.341  0.6237  0.072  0.21
Rubinstein 1966   15  0.698  0.035  0.137  0.4056  0.0410  0.13
Rudanovskaya 2007   28  0.6630  0.0053  0.0358  0.0357  0.0464  0.03
Shebanova 2002   6  0.712  0.102  0.224  0.5052  0.064  0.17
Smith 1975   13  0.696  0.058  0.108  0.3549  0.067  0.14
Sztompka 1959   19  0.6821  0.0017  0.0716  0.2644  0.0613  0.12
Tanyel 1992   32  0.6542  0.0042  0.0538  0.0543  0.0542  0.05
Tsujii 2005   4  0.737  0.0411  0.0714  0.2844  0.0515  0.12
Uninsky 1959   25  0.6731  0.0026  0.0828  0.1560  0.0427  0.08
Vardi 1988   59  0.5440  0.0061  0.0450  0.0456  0.0449  0.04
Wasowski 1980   24  0.6744  0.0023  0.0726  0.1753  0.0524  0.09
Zimerman 1975   46  0.6213  0.0145  0.0453  0.0462  0.0456  0.04
Random 1   66  -0.0262  0.0066  0.0166  0.0147  0.0366  0.02
Random 2   65  0.0153  0.0065  0.0265  0.0222  0.2334  0.07
Random 3   64  0.0557  0.0064  0.0362  0.0335  0.0554  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).