Fou 1978

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   63  0.2037  0.0017  0.0629  0.1929  0.3025  0.24
Ax 1995   58  0.4419  0.0135  0.0933  0.0916  0.4727  0.21
Bacha 1998   45  0.4954  0.0038  0.0644  0.0614  0.3533  0.14
Barbosa 1983   48  0.4735  0.0012  0.1913  0.446  0.6112  0.52
BenOr 1989   5  0.6415  0.019  0.196  0.618  0.577  0.59
Biret 1990   37  0.5316  0.0140  0.0738  0.0731  0.1441  0.10
Brailowsky 1960   47  0.4732  0.0045  0.0742  0.0719  0.3530  0.16
Chiu 1999   30  0.5440  0.0019  0.0819  0.3112  0.4218  0.36
Clidat 1994   59  0.4345  0.0054  0.0552  0.0556  0.0459  0.04
Cohen 1997   61  0.3936  0.0048  0.0740  0.0717  0.5229  0.19
Cortot 1951   8  0.6251  0.0027  0.0726  0.233  0.5321  0.35
Csalog 1996   19  0.5842  0.0033  0.0739  0.0754  0.0452  0.05
Czerny 1989   13  0.616  0.0811  0.194  0.637  0.584  0.60
Ezaki 2006   31  0.5412  0.0234  0.0737  0.0734  0.0743  0.07
Falvay 1989   16  0.609  0.0330  0.0828  0.1945  0.0636  0.11
Fiorentino 1962   10  0.6218  0.018  0.199  0.564  0.5610  0.56
Fliere 1977   6  0.633  0.114  0.192  0.671  0.741  0.70
Fou 1978   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Francois 1956   54  0.4530  0.0059  0.0456  0.0439  0.0756  0.05
Goldenweiser 1946   39  0.5152  0.0049  0.0648  0.0643  0.0647  0.06
Gornostaeva 1994   29  0.5523  0.0020  0.0821  0.291  0.7015  0.45
Groot 1988   27  0.5511  0.0226  0.0730  0.1837  0.0835  0.12
Hatto 1993   3  0.655  0.083  0.197  0.606  0.616  0.60
Hatto 1997   11  0.6228  0.0013  0.2611  0.5010  0.5313  0.51
Horszowski 1983   33  0.5443  0.0010  0.1812  0.4612  0.5911  0.52
Indjic 2001   2  0.6624  0.007  0.248  0.588  0.588  0.58
Katin 1996   18  0.5938  0.0031  0.0732  0.1438  0.0837  0.11
Kiepura 1999   44  0.4963  0.0018  0.0727  0.219  0.5422  0.34
Korecka 1992   22  0.5748  0.0037  0.0645  0.0614  0.5828  0.19
Kushner 1990   38  0.5233  0.0043  0.0647  0.0631  0.1442  0.09
Lilamand 2001   50  0.4634  0.0046  0.0646  0.0635  0.0846  0.07
Luisada 1990   14  0.612  0.122  0.1610  0.569  0.579  0.56
Luisada 2008   26  0.5610  0.0215  0.1514  0.436  0.5514  0.49
Lushtak 2004   21  0.5720  0.0022  0.0818  0.3126  0.2524  0.28
Malcuzynski 1951   53  0.4565  0.0051  0.0554  0.0527  0.2639  0.11
Malcuzynski 1961   9  0.621  0.191  0.185  0.625  0.585  0.60
Magaloff 1977   28  0.5526  0.0036  0.0934  0.0921  0.2831  0.16
Magin 1975   40  0.5162  0.0039  0.0649  0.0637  0.0748  0.06
Meguri 1997   49  0.4658  0.0063  0.0364  0.0354  0.0464  0.03
Milkina 1970   20  0.5839  0.0032  0.0731  0.1439  0.0740  0.10
Mohovich 1999   4  0.647  0.066  0.201  0.673  0.673  0.67
Nezu 2005   34  0.5455  0.0055  0.0553  0.0558  0.0461  0.04
Ohlsson 1999   60  0.4131  0.0057  0.0555  0.0558  0.0458  0.04
Olejniczak 1990   1  0.664  0.095  0.243  0.653  0.712  0.68
Osinska 1989   23  0.5660  0.0047  0.0835  0.0842  0.0644  0.07
Perlemuter 1992   52  0.4622  0.0058  0.0359  0.0335  0.0751  0.05
Poblocka 1999   15  0.608  0.0425  0.0824  0.2428  0.2026  0.22
Rangell 2001   43  0.5049  0.0050  0.0650  0.0652  0.0555  0.05
Richter 1960   41  0.5129  0.0044  0.0741  0.0745  0.0550  0.06
Richter 1961   25  0.5614  0.0121  0.0716  0.3511  0.5317  0.43
Rosen 1989   56  0.4461  0.0061  0.0360  0.0341  0.0754  0.05
Rubinstein 1939   36  0.5341  0.0041  0.0836  0.0836  0.0745  0.07
Rubinstein 1952   51  0.4657  0.0052  0.0457  0.0455  0.0562  0.04
Rubinstein 1966   35  0.5317  0.0116  0.0917  0.3237  0.0732  0.15
Rudanovskaya 2007   7  0.6313  0.0128  0.0922  0.2619  0.3623  0.31
Shebanova 2002   46  0.4956  0.0053  0.0651  0.0652  0.0553  0.05
Smith 1975   57  0.4444  0.0062  0.0361  0.0358  0.0463  0.03
Sztompka 1959   17  0.6027  0.0029  0.0823  0.2410  0.5419  0.36
Tanyel 1992   62  0.3464  0.0060  0.0362  0.0356  0.0560  0.04
Tsujii 2005   12  0.6147  0.0024  0.1020  0.3035  0.0734  0.14
Uninsky 1959   32  0.5459  0.0042  0.0643  0.0641  0.0649  0.06
Vardi 1988   24  0.5625  0.0014  0.1515  0.3613  0.5316  0.44
Wasowski 1980   55  0.4453  0.0056  0.0458  0.0453  0.0557  0.04
Zimerman 1975   42  0.5121  0.0023  0.0925  0.2314  0.5220  0.35
Random 1   65  0.0246  0.0066  0.0166  0.0131  0.1065  0.03
Random 2   64  0.0750  0.0064  0.0363  0.0318  0.3738  0.11
Random 3   66  0.0066  0.0065  0.0265  0.0235  0.0566  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).