Bacha 1998

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   63  0.1463  0.0027  0.0528  0.1650  0.0631  0.10
Ax 1995   52  0.3626  0.0016  0.0723  0.2746  0.0527  0.12
Bacha 1998   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Barbosa 1983   60  0.3117  0.0111  0.1712  0.4132  0.1514  0.25
BenOr 1989   47  0.3924  0.0054  0.0540  0.0560  0.0357  0.04
Biret 1990   43  0.4120  0.0045  0.0545  0.0561  0.0358  0.04
Brailowsky 1960   35  0.4521  0.0015  0.0918  0.3126  0.2710  0.29
Chiu 1999   6  0.5314  0.018  0.166  0.5726  0.259  0.38
Clidat 1994   51  0.3838  0.0047  0.0549  0.0553  0.0544  0.05
Cohen 1997   62  0.2743  0.0060  0.0358  0.0357  0.0361  0.03
Cortot 1951   13  0.5159  0.0030  0.0630  0.1437  0.0632  0.09
Csalog 1996   25  0.4822  0.0034  0.0546  0.0559  0.0353  0.04
Czerny 1989   53  0.3665  0.0052  0.0454  0.0462  0.0360  0.03
Ezaki 2006   57  0.3450  0.0063  0.0263  0.0262  0.0262  0.02
Falvay 1989   15  0.5011  0.0125  0.1020  0.2960  0.0430  0.11
Fiorentino 1962   27  0.4710  0.0221  0.0817  0.3140  0.0720  0.15
Fliere 1977   2  0.566  0.064  0.234  0.629  0.492  0.55
Fou 1978   22  0.4935  0.0020  0.0914  0.3544  0.0621  0.14
Francois 1956   33  0.4533  0.0043  0.0734  0.0727  0.2823  0.14
Goldenweiser 1946   40  0.4251  0.0053  0.0550  0.0545  0.0638  0.05
Gornostaeva 1994   58  0.3331  0.0039  0.0636  0.0637  0.0835  0.07
Groot 1988   37  0.4423  0.0048  0.0552  0.0557  0.0459  0.04
Hatto 1993   3  0.552  0.152  0.203  0.6215  0.483  0.55
Hatto 1997   11  0.5129  0.0010  0.159  0.5230  0.1511  0.28
Horszowski 1983   49  0.3939  0.0022  0.1124  0.2544  0.0528  0.11
Indjic 2001   4  0.5416  0.016  0.227  0.5624  0.327  0.42
Katin 1996   32  0.4657  0.0051  0.0453  0.0460  0.0452  0.04
Kiepura 1999   50  0.3961  0.0059  0.0359  0.0340  0.0649  0.04
Korecka 1992   14  0.5142  0.0014  0.0816  0.3317  0.508  0.41
Kushner 1990   9  0.525  0.065  0.248  0.5210  0.475  0.49
Lilamand 2001   59  0.3256  0.0057  0.0360  0.0365  0.0264  0.02
Luisada 1990   7  0.533  0.113  0.255  0.6124  0.326  0.44
Luisada 2008   5  0.534  0.077  0.252  0.6311  0.434  0.52
Lushtak 2004   36  0.4548  0.0037  0.0638  0.0658  0.0445  0.05
Malcuzynski 1951   46  0.3964  0.0046  0.0544  0.0537  0.0648  0.05
Malcuzynski 1961   24  0.4837  0.0018  0.1010  0.4336  0.0717  0.17
Magaloff 1977   42  0.4152  0.0050  0.0551  0.0549  0.0543  0.05
Magin 1975   31  0.4625  0.0017  0.0722  0.2847  0.0525  0.12
Meguri 1997   48  0.3955  0.0065  0.0265  0.0265  0.0263  0.02
Milkina 1970   23  0.4944  0.0036  0.0542  0.0557  0.0450  0.04
Mohovich 1999   18  0.5034  0.0012  0.1513  0.3742  0.0619  0.15
Nezu 2005   8  0.5219  0.0029  0.0727  0.2136  0.0726  0.12
Ohlsson 1999   30  0.469  0.0313  0.0921  0.2840  0.0624  0.13
Olejniczak 1990   21  0.498  0.0323  0.0826  0.2231  0.1318  0.17
Osinska 1989   20  0.4940  0.0035  0.0548  0.0549  0.0539  0.05
Perlemuter 1992   26  0.4849  0.0044  0.0637  0.0626  0.2129  0.11
Poblocka 1999   19  0.5012  0.0119  0.0815  0.3432  0.1416  0.22
Rangell 2001   54  0.3646  0.0061  0.0262  0.0262  0.0365  0.02
Richter 1960   41  0.4253  0.0040  0.0543  0.0540  0.0641  0.05
Richter 1961   38  0.4262  0.0038  0.0639  0.0644  0.0736  0.06
Rosen 1989   55  0.3666  0.0066  0.0166  0.0164  0.0266  0.01
Rubinstein 1939   1  0.571  0.311  0.311  0.6413  0.511  0.57
Rubinstein 1952   17  0.5030  0.009  0.1411  0.4232  0.1613  0.26
Rubinstein 1966   45  0.4058  0.0041  0.0635  0.0658  0.0440  0.05
Rudanovskaya 2007   10  0.5215  0.0133  0.0547  0.0556  0.0455  0.04
Shebanova 2002   34  0.4532  0.0042  0.0733  0.0754  0.0442  0.05
Smith 1975   28  0.477  0.0431  0.0632  0.1244  0.0633  0.08
Sztompka 1959   12  0.5113  0.0124  0.0819  0.3028  0.1815  0.23
Tanyel 1992   61  0.2847  0.0058  0.0357  0.0353  0.0556  0.04
Tsujii 2005   16  0.5027  0.0032  0.0731  0.1363  0.0337  0.06
Uninsky 1959   39  0.4245  0.0055  0.0455  0.0455  0.0451  0.04
Vardi 1988   44  0.4054  0.0028  0.0629  0.1558  0.0434  0.08
Wasowski 1980   29  0.4628  0.0026  0.0825  0.2424  0.2812  0.26
Zimerman 1975   56  0.3536  0.0049  0.0541  0.0545  0.0647  0.05
Random 1   64  0.0618  0.0156  0.0456  0.042  0.5122  0.14
Random 2   65  0.0360  0.0062  0.0261  0.0233  0.0754  0.04
Random 3   66  0.0241  0.0064  0.0264  0.0227  0.1346  0.05

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).