Fliere 1977

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   3  0.907  0.034  0.175  0.4817  0.328  0.39
Ax 1995   57  0.7242  0.0057  0.0458  0.0436  0.0760  0.05
Bacha 1998   41  0.8050  0.0034  0.0552  0.0536  0.0748  0.06
Barbosa 1983   58  0.7117  0.0145  0.0549  0.0534  0.0850  0.06
BenOr 1989   35  0.8421  0.0039  0.0642  0.0637  0.0654  0.06
Biret 1990   6  0.8916  0.0110  0.097  0.4718  0.329  0.39
Brailowsky 1960   13  0.875  0.0512  0.096  0.484  0.544  0.51
Chiu 1999   38  0.8128  0.0044  0.0543  0.0519  0.2237  0.10
Clidat 1994   40  0.8147  0.0042  0.0547  0.0528  0.2734  0.12
Cohen 1997   62  0.6643  0.0061  0.0364  0.0340  0.0759  0.05
Cortot 1951   52  0.7439  0.0052  0.0457  0.0439  0.0564  0.04
Csalog 1996   31  0.8413  0.0121  0.0630  0.1223  0.2525  0.17
Czerny 1989   54  0.7227  0.0051  0.0551  0.0543  0.0555  0.05
Ezaki 2006   49  0.7752  0.0063  0.0360  0.0349  0.0465  0.03
Falvay 1989   15  0.8656  0.0030  0.0629  0.1539  0.0638  0.09
Fiorentino 1962   8  0.8922  0.0024  0.0724  0.2519  0.3222  0.28
Fliere 1977   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Fou 1978   48  0.7710  0.0214  0.0926  0.2137  0.0733  0.12
Francois 1956   50  0.7724  0.0054  0.0454  0.0430  0.1345  0.07
Goldenweiser 1946   61  0.6741  0.0050  0.0641  0.0650  0.0647  0.06
Gornostaeva 1994   36  0.8157  0.0043  0.0636  0.0628  0.1440  0.09
Groot 1988   1  0.941  0.221  0.223  0.683  0.553  0.61
Hatto 1993   19  0.8614  0.0119  0.0619  0.2916  0.3817  0.33
Hatto 1997   28  0.8537  0.0018  0.0818  0.3416  0.3316  0.33
Horszowski 1983   55  0.7231  0.0046  0.0638  0.0648  0.0646  0.06
Indjic 2001   25  0.8530  0.0020  0.1023  0.2515  0.3721  0.30
Katin 1996   4  0.8961  0.0013  0.0810  0.4514  0.456  0.45
Kiepura 1999   63  0.6648  0.0058  0.0362  0.0345  0.0561  0.04
Korecka 1992   45  0.7934  0.0033  0.0544  0.0531  0.1539  0.09
Kushner 1990   56  0.7260  0.0049  0.0546  0.0539  0.0657  0.05
Lilamand 2001   60  0.6726  0.0059  0.0455  0.0434  0.1143  0.07
Luisada 1990   16  0.8625  0.0017  0.1314  0.3819  0.2719  0.32
Luisada 2008   12  0.889  0.027  0.094  0.557  0.465  0.50
Lushtak 2004   9  0.8920  0.0126  0.0720  0.2915  0.3620  0.32
Malcuzynski 1951   59  0.714  0.089  0.0821  0.2812  0.2723  0.27
Malcuzynski 1961   44  0.8012  0.015  0.128  0.4618  0.3010  0.37
Magaloff 1977   18  0.8646  0.0038  0.0635  0.0657  0.0558  0.05
Magin 1975   30  0.846  0.046  0.0913  0.3817  0.3212  0.35
Meguri 1997   47  0.7763  0.0060  0.0361  0.0355  0.0466  0.03
Milkina 1970   43  0.8032  0.0041  0.0637  0.0635  0.0749  0.06
Mohovich 1999   24  0.8535  0.0037  0.0453  0.0423  0.3535  0.12
Nezu 2005   42  0.8054  0.0047  0.0933  0.0956  0.0453  0.06
Ohlsson 1999   2  0.923  0.142  0.262  0.682  0.582  0.63
Olejniczak 1990   7  0.8918  0.0111  0.0915  0.3620  0.3214  0.34
Osinska 1989   23  0.8536  0.0025  0.0925  0.2348  0.0436  0.10
Perlemuter 1992   14  0.8749  0.0022  0.0817  0.362  0.557  0.44
Poblocka 1999   20  0.8623  0.0023  0.0822  0.2834  0.0728  0.14
Rangell 2001   51  0.7666  0.0062  0.0363  0.0340  0.0563  0.04
Richter 1960   32  0.8411  0.0135  0.0639  0.0618  0.3229  0.14
Richter 1961   46  0.798  0.0248  0.0640  0.0618  0.3926  0.15
Rosen 1989   33  0.8444  0.0029  0.0828  0.1727  0.1427  0.15
Rubinstein 1939   26  0.8519  0.0115  0.0811  0.4117  0.3011  0.35
Rubinstein 1952   34  0.8433  0.008  0.1012  0.4017  0.2818  0.33
Rubinstein 1966   11  0.8829  0.0016  0.129  0.4620  0.2315  0.33
Rudanovskaya 2007   37  0.8140  0.0056  0.0456  0.0444  0.0562  0.04
Shebanova 2002   21  0.8645  0.0027  0.0916  0.3617  0.3313  0.34
Smith 1975   17  0.8658  0.0040  0.0734  0.0724  0.2531  0.13
Sztompka 1959   29  0.8538  0.0032  0.0632  0.129  0.4124  0.22
Tanyel 1992   39  0.8162  0.0053  0.0545  0.0535  0.0752  0.06
Tsujii 2005   5  0.8959  0.0028  0.0927  0.1932  0.1030  0.14
Uninsky 1959   22  0.8551  0.0031  0.0631  0.1236  0.0641  0.08
Vardi 1988   53  0.7253  0.0055  0.0550  0.0540  0.0656  0.05
Wasowski 1980   10  0.882  0.213  0.311  0.692  0.581  0.63
Zimerman 1975   27  0.8515  0.0136  0.0548  0.0531  0.1242  0.08
Random 1   66  -0.1055  0.0065  0.0265  0.0211  0.2744  0.07
Random 2   65  0.0764  0.0066  0.0166  0.0115  0.3551  0.06
Random 3   64  0.1765  0.0064  0.0459  0.045  0.4432  0.13

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).