Random 3

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   6  0.2157  0.0013  0.069  0.3557  0.046  0.12
Ax 1995   29  0.166  0.036  0.0810  0.3365  0.0314  0.10
Bacha 1998   24  0.1732  0.0034  0.0448  0.0462  0.0436  0.04
Barbosa 1983   23  0.1736  0.0025  0.0720  0.2365  0.0325  0.08
BenOr 1989   57  0.0954  0.0030  0.0432  0.0864  0.0334  0.05
Biret 1990   36  0.1545  0.0040  0.0443  0.0465  0.0362  0.03
Brailowsky 1960   27  0.1630  0.0139  0.0446  0.0463  0.0344  0.03
Chiu 1999   65  0.0546  0.0061  0.0360  0.0365  0.0346  0.03
Clidat 1994   45  0.1335  0.0058  0.0355  0.0364  0.0353  0.03
Cohen 1997   60  0.084  0.0464  0.0362  0.0360  0.0360  0.03
Cortot 1951   55  0.0927  0.0153  0.0352  0.0364  0.0364  0.03
Csalog 1996   46  0.1355  0.0060  0.0361  0.0365  0.0351  0.03
Czerny 1989   19  0.1848  0.0020  0.0515  0.3065  0.0317  0.09
Ezaki 2006   31  0.1613  0.0221  0.0526  0.1765  0.0227  0.06
Falvay 1989   54  0.0963  0.0052  0.0353  0.0360  0.0347  0.03
Fiorentino 1962   59  0.0839  0.0062  0.0264  0.0264  0.0366  0.02
Fliere 1977   22  0.173  0.073  0.125  0.4460  0.037  0.11
Fou 1978   21  0.175  0.037  0.1113  0.3160  0.0410  0.11
Francois 1956   5  0.2125  0.0128  0.0528  0.1261  0.0333  0.06
Goldenweiser 1946   26  0.1750  0.0018  0.0619  0.2462  0.0320  0.08
Gornostaeva 1994   8  0.2011  0.028  0.106  0.4360  0.044  0.13
Groot 1988   43  0.1342  0.0032  0.0430  0.1060  0.0432  0.06
Hatto 1993   56  0.0966  0.0036  0.0441  0.0463  0.0363  0.03
Hatto 1997   58  0.0864  0.0049  0.0538  0.0565  0.0339  0.04
Horszowski 1983   4  0.2112  0.025  0.144  0.4760  0.041  0.14
Indjic 2001   61  0.0767  0.0038  0.0447  0.0465  0.0358  0.03
Katin 1996   25  0.177  0.0342  0.0442  0.0458  0.0437  0.04
Kiepura 1999   9  0.1918  0.0144  0.0634  0.0663  0.0335  0.04
Korecka 1992   3  0.212  0.182  0.321  0.5463  0.032  0.13
Kushner 1990   11  0.1923  0.0119  0.0523  0.2062  0.0324  0.08
Lilamand 2001   41  0.1314  0.0131  0.0431  0.0863  0.0238  0.04
Luisada 1990   18  0.1847  0.0041  0.0537  0.0562  0.0341  0.04
Luisada 2008   20  0.1826  0.0110  0.1214  0.3058  0.0411  0.11
Lushtak 2004   30  0.1643  0.0043  0.0635  0.0663  0.0342  0.04
Malcuzynski 1951   7  0.2133  0.0015  0.0617  0.2765  0.0319  0.09
Malcuzynski 1961   33  0.1653  0.0026  0.0625  0.1965  0.0323  0.08
Magaloff 1977   37  0.1541  0.0017  0.0716  0.2864  0.0318  0.09
Magin 1975   10  0.1917  0.019  0.097  0.4264  0.039  0.11
Meguri 1997   62  0.078  0.0354  0.0357  0.0362  0.0350  0.03
Milkina 1970   2  0.211  0.241  0.242  0.5364  0.033  0.13
Mohovich 1999   39  0.1438  0.0046  0.0449  0.0461  0.0359  0.03
Nezu 2005   40  0.1459  0.0047  0.0536  0.0565  0.0443  0.04
Ohlsson 1999   17  0.1858  0.0037  0.0440  0.0465  0.0349  0.03
Olejniczak 1990   63  0.0716  0.0148  0.0450  0.0462  0.0365  0.03
Osinska 1989   13  0.1852  0.0022  0.0621  0.2260  0.0416  0.09
Perlemuter 1992   35  0.1549  0.0023  0.0622  0.2061  0.0321  0.08
Poblocka 1999   38  0.1544  0.0033  0.0433  0.0862  0.0428  0.06
Rangell 2001   64  0.0560  0.0065  0.0265  0.0265  0.0267  0.02
Richter 1960   32  0.1628  0.0145  0.0445  0.0462  0.0352  0.03
Richter 1961   51  0.1124  0.0163  0.0359  0.0364  0.0345  0.03
Rosen 1989   52  0.1031  0.0155  0.0354  0.0362  0.0357  0.03
Rubinstein 1939   1  0.2219  0.0114  0.078  0.4064  0.038  0.11
Rubinstein 1952   15  0.1837  0.0016  0.0812  0.3165  0.0315  0.10
Rubinstein 1966   16  0.1822  0.014  0.153  0.4864  0.035  0.12
Rudanovskaya 2007   50  0.1110  0.0259  0.0358  0.0358  0.0454  0.03
Shebanova 2002   44  0.1361  0.0035  0.0539  0.0564  0.0340  0.04
Smith 1975   53  0.099  0.0356  0.0356  0.0365  0.0348  0.03
Sztompka 1959   34  0.1615  0.0111  0.0724  0.1964  0.0230  0.06
Tanyel 1992   47  0.1262  0.0057  0.0363  0.0361  0.0355  0.03
Tsujii 2005   48  0.1151  0.0050  0.0444  0.0462  0.0356  0.03
Uninsky 1959   42  0.1329  0.0127  0.0727  0.1559  0.0422  0.08
Vardi 1988   14  0.1834  0.0029  0.0529  0.1165  0.0329  0.06
Wasowski 1980   12  0.1840  0.0012  0.0711  0.3258  0.0312  0.10
Zimerman 1975   49  0.1156  0.0051  0.0451  0.0465  0.0361  0.03
Average   28  0.1665  0.0024  0.0518  0.2463  0.0413  0.10
Random 1   66  0.0021  0.0166  0.0266  0.0210  0.2926  0.08
Random 2   67  -0.0120  0.0167  0.0167  0.016  0.4231  0.06
Random 3   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target

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).