Gornostaeva 1994

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   63  0.1255  0.0042  0.0644  0.0651  0.0548  0.05
Ax 1995   61  0.2047  0.0057  0.0458  0.0462  0.0360  0.03
Bacha 1998   44  0.3324  0.0034  0.0837  0.0836  0.0635  0.07
Barbosa 1983   30  0.4026  0.0012  0.0913  0.5031  0.1710  0.29
BenOr 1989   1  0.551  0.381  0.372  0.6921  0.412  0.53
Biret 1990   29  0.4033  0.0033  0.0934  0.0949  0.0538  0.07
Brailowsky 1960   52  0.2721  0.0153  0.0553  0.0556  0.0449  0.04
Chiu 1999   50  0.3065  0.0052  0.0741  0.0761  0.0444  0.05
Clidat 1994   53  0.2654  0.0054  0.0649  0.0661  0.0353  0.04
Cohen 1997   54  0.2540  0.0041  0.0552  0.0528  0.2828  0.12
Cortot 1951   5  0.517  0.0310  0.187  0.589  0.393  0.48
Csalog 1996   11  0.4849  0.0015  0.1312  0.5248  0.0519  0.16
Czerny 1989   7  0.5014  0.013  0.196  0.6130  0.198  0.34
Ezaki 2006   26  0.416  0.0423  0.1223  0.3343  0.0623  0.14
Falvay 1989   3  0.518  0.024  0.184  0.6352  0.0517  0.18
Fiorentino 1962   20  0.4443  0.0019  0.0916  0.4837  0.0916  0.21
Fliere 1977   16  0.4620  0.0117  0.1019  0.4724  0.209  0.31
Fou 1978   2  0.552  0.112  0.271  0.7021  0.294  0.45
Francois 1956   49  0.3031  0.0055  0.0557  0.0553  0.0457  0.04
Goldenweiser 1946   37  0.3915  0.0137  0.0739  0.0758  0.0443  0.05
Gornostaeva 1994   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Groot 1988   31  0.4056  0.0027  0.0824  0.3253  0.0527  0.13
Hatto 1993   12  0.4750  0.0018  0.0921  0.4154  0.0525  0.14
Hatto 1997   17  0.4557  0.0022  0.1320  0.4356  0.0426  0.13
Horszowski 1983   39  0.3639  0.0028  0.0827  0.2754  0.0430  0.10
Indjic 2001   8  0.4932  0.0014  0.1010  0.5446  0.0520  0.16
Katin 1996   33  0.4063  0.0043  0.0651  0.0664  0.0351  0.04
Kiepura 1999   45  0.3344  0.0031  0.0931  0.1839  0.0729  0.11
Korecka 1992   4  0.515  0.067  0.173  0.6710  0.611  0.64
Kushner 1990   36  0.3923  0.0035  0.0740  0.0741  0.0639  0.06
Lilamand 2001   46  0.3258  0.0048  0.0835  0.0856  0.0440  0.06
Luisada 1990   9  0.4827  0.0013  0.119  0.5536  0.0814  0.21
Luisada 2008   27  0.4122  0.0030  0.0830  0.1951  0.0531  0.10
Lushtak 2004   13  0.4611  0.028  0.1518  0.4830  0.1312  0.25
Malcuzynski 1951   25  0.4342  0.0025  0.0826  0.2824  0.2911  0.28
Malcuzynski 1961   21  0.444  0.075  0.1611  0.5344  0.0618  0.18
Magaloff 1977   23  0.4318  0.0132  0.0832  0.1558  0.0434  0.08
Magin 1975   15  0.4645  0.0021  0.1417  0.4855  0.0521  0.15
Meguri 1997   42  0.3441  0.0047  0.0645  0.0653  0.0446  0.05
Milkina 1970   32  0.4051  0.0039  0.1033  0.1050  0.0536  0.07
Mohovich 1999   10  0.4812  0.026  0.198  0.5733  0.0815  0.21
Nezu 2005   34  0.3952  0.0045  0.0650  0.0661  0.0355  0.04
Ohlsson 1999   62  0.1948  0.0065  0.0265  0.0265  0.0264  0.02
Olejniczak 1990   19  0.4416  0.0116  0.1014  0.4923  0.256  0.35
Osinska 1989   22  0.4438  0.0020  0.1022  0.3832  0.1413  0.23
Perlemuter 1992   56  0.2429  0.0064  0.0264  0.0264  0.0261  0.02
Poblocka 1999   38  0.3717  0.0146  0.0648  0.0661  0.0350  0.04
Rangell 2001   51  0.2761  0.0056  0.0555  0.0563  0.0356  0.04
Richter 1960   40  0.3636  0.0044  0.0554  0.0556  0.0547  0.05
Richter 1961   14  0.469  0.0211  0.1115  0.4930  0.237  0.34
Rosen 1989   58  0.2362  0.0061  0.0359  0.0362  0.0265  0.02
Rubinstein 1939   48  0.3010  0.0251  0.0742  0.0760  0.0345  0.05
Rubinstein 1952   47  0.3134  0.0040  0.0743  0.0743  0.0642  0.06
Rubinstein 1966   41  0.3613  0.0129  0.0929  0.2360  0.0333  0.08
Rudanovskaya 2007   24  0.4346  0.0038  0.0836  0.0847  0.0541  0.06
Shebanova 2002   43  0.3353  0.0049  0.0647  0.0661  0.0352  0.04
Smith 1975   59  0.2359  0.0063  0.0263  0.0265  0.0262  0.02
Sztompka 1959   35  0.3928  0.0036  0.0738  0.0740  0.0737  0.07
Tanyel 1992   60  0.2166  0.0058  0.0556  0.0557  0.0454  0.04
Tsujii 2005   18  0.4530  0.0026  0.0928  0.2558  0.0432  0.10
Uninsky 1959   57  0.2464  0.0060  0.0262  0.0265  0.0263  0.02
Vardi 1988   6  0.503  0.089  0.145  0.6126  0.205  0.35
Wasowski 1980   55  0.2425  0.0059  0.0361  0.0360  0.0358  0.03
Zimerman 1975   28  0.4019  0.0124  0.0825  0.2938  0.0724  0.14
Random 1   66  -0.0135  0.0066  0.0166  0.0147  0.0466  0.02
Random 2   64  0.1037  0.0050  0.0646  0.0615  0.4022  0.15
Random 3   65  0.0060  0.0062  0.0360  0.0343  0.0459  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).