Hatto 1993

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   19  0.8552  0.0026  0.0726  0.2626  0.2025  0.23
Ax 1995   45  0.7757  0.0048  0.0645  0.0620  0.2239  0.11
Bacha 1998   14  0.8653  0.0013  0.0812  0.4317  0.4213  0.42
Barbosa 1983   43  0.7854  0.0016  0.0815  0.382  0.5910  0.47
BenOr 1989   13  0.8627  0.0012  0.0827  0.2614  0.3521  0.30
Biret 1990   17  0.855  0.0029  0.1225  0.2730  0.1131  0.17
Brailowsky 1960   41  0.7958  0.0035  0.0737  0.0716  0.3732  0.16
Chiu 1999   28  0.8320  0.0031  0.0730  0.176  0.3924  0.26
Clidat 1994   38  0.7942  0.0036  0.0736  0.0721  0.3633  0.16
Cohen 1997   62  0.5755  0.0063  0.0457  0.0448  0.0561  0.04
Cortot 1951   56  0.7239  0.0054  0.0460  0.0453  0.0462  0.04
Csalog 1996   40  0.7923  0.0046  0.0552  0.0534  0.0850  0.06
Czerny 1989   42  0.7911  0.0039  0.0834  0.0818  0.3530  0.17
Ezaki 2006   39  0.7924  0.0053  0.0648  0.0621  0.2536  0.12
Falvay 1989   3  0.9128  0.003  0.164  0.577  0.478  0.52
Fiorentino 1962   29  0.8231  0.0041  0.0647  0.0633  0.0947  0.07
Fliere 1977   16  0.8640  0.0024  0.0616  0.3819  0.2916  0.33
Fou 1978   30  0.8218  0.0019  0.0922  0.2811  0.4017  0.33
Francois 1956   60  0.6561  0.0058  0.0364  0.0351  0.0465  0.03
Goldenweiser 1946   58  0.6843  0.0045  0.0549  0.0531  0.1146  0.07
Gornostaeva 1994   35  0.816  0.0042  0.0738  0.0734  0.0652  0.06
Groot 1988   11  0.8822  0.0011  0.0911  0.4516  0.3314  0.39
Hatto 1993   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Hatto 1997   2  0.991  0.591  0.582  0.982  0.982  0.98
Horszowski 1983   46  0.7748  0.0038  0.0833  0.0835  0.0845  0.08
Indjic 2001   1  0.992  0.392  0.951  0.991  0.991  0.99
Katin 1996   10  0.8834  0.006  0.156  0.555  0.545  0.54
Kiepura 1999   61  0.6562  0.0057  0.0553  0.0534  0.0748  0.06
Korecka 1992   24  0.8432  0.0023  0.0724  0.2712  0.4118  0.33
Kushner 1990   55  0.7249  0.0044  0.0644  0.0635  0.0749  0.06
Lilamand 2001   63  0.5621  0.0061  0.0459  0.0444  0.0654  0.05
Luisada 1990   25  0.8435  0.0025  0.0723  0.2845  0.0538  0.12
Luisada 2008   15  0.8638  0.0017  0.0917  0.3620  0.2919  0.32
Lushtak 2004   37  0.8012  0.0049  0.0554  0.0536  0.0655  0.05
Malcuzynski 1951   59  0.6741  0.0043  0.0646  0.0621  0.1940  0.11
Malcuzynski 1961   22  0.8416  0.0015  0.139  0.4812  0.4211  0.45
Magaloff 1977   23  0.8419  0.0033  0.0739  0.0720  0.2535  0.13
Magin 1975   9  0.8829  0.008  0.145  0.565  0.534  0.54
Meguri 1997   47  0.778  0.0056  0.0455  0.0446  0.0558  0.04
Milkina 1970   36  0.8036  0.0030  0.0931  0.1622  0.2129  0.18
Mohovich 1999   52  0.7515  0.0050  0.0551  0.0564  0.0360  0.04
Nezu 2005   21  0.843  0.0028  0.0920  0.2920  0.3120  0.30
Ohlsson 1999   5  0.8956  0.004  0.133  0.578  0.516  0.54
Olejniczak 1990   20  0.8426  0.0037  0.0735  0.0732  0.1441  0.10
Osinska 1989   26  0.8444  0.0010  0.1028  0.2423  0.1726  0.20
Perlemuter 1992   50  0.7663  0.0047  0.0550  0.0559  0.0357  0.04
Poblocka 1999   12  0.877  0.0018  0.0913  0.4115  0.3115  0.36
Rangell 2001   54  0.7364  0.0060  0.0458  0.0432  0.0853  0.06
Richter 1960   44  0.7725  0.0051  0.0642  0.0631  0.1343  0.09
Richter 1961   53  0.7310  0.0055  0.0361  0.0327  0.2542  0.09
Rosen 1989   48  0.7765  0.0034  0.0643  0.0647  0.0556  0.05
Rubinstein 1939   34  0.8145  0.0020  0.0721  0.2920  0.2722  0.28
Rubinstein 1952   32  0.8246  0.0022  0.0818  0.3222  0.2323  0.27
Rubinstein 1966   18  0.8550  0.0021  0.0819  0.3148  0.0537  0.12
Rudanovskaya 2007   51  0.7566  0.0062  0.0456  0.0455  0.0459  0.04
Shebanova 2002   8  0.8814  0.005  0.137  0.555  0.547  0.54
Smith 1975   33  0.819  0.0032  0.0732  0.1315  0.3227  0.20
Sztompka 1959   7  0.8837  0.009  0.1110  0.473  0.643  0.55
Tanyel 1992   57  0.7030  0.0059  0.0363  0.0362  0.0363  0.03
Tsujii 2005   27  0.8433  0.0040  0.0740  0.0745  0.0551  0.06
Uninsky 1959   4  0.8947  0.007  0.128  0.4911  0.459  0.47
Vardi 1988   49  0.7617  0.0052  0.0741  0.0721  0.2734  0.14
Wasowski 1980   31  0.824  0.0027  0.0929  0.2228  0.1728  0.19
Zimerman 1975   6  0.8813  0.0014  0.1014  0.402  0.5012  0.45
Random 1   66  -0.1251  0.0066  0.0166  0.0152  0.0366  0.02
Random 2   65  0.0659  0.0065  0.0265  0.029  0.4044  0.09
Random 3   64  0.0960  0.0064  0.0362  0.0340  0.0464  0.03

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).