Kushner 1990

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   65  0.0860  0.0050  0.0739  0.0755  0.0545  0.06
Ax 1995   57  0.3646  0.0026  0.0828  0.2229  0.2719  0.24
Bacha 1998   16  0.525  0.0410  0.1311  0.479  0.525  0.49
Barbosa 1983   60  0.3056  0.0040  0.0552  0.0536  0.0941  0.07
BenOr 1989   21  0.508  0.028  0.1422  0.3332  0.1620  0.23
Biret 1990   47  0.4258  0.0043  0.0551  0.0555  0.0461  0.04
Brailowsky 1960   20  0.5021  0.0014  0.1314  0.4011  0.556  0.47
Chiu 1999   42  0.4441  0.0015  0.1021  0.3531  0.2114  0.27
Clidat 1994   40  0.4435  0.0031  0.0633  0.1445  0.0638  0.09
Cohen 1997   52  0.4019  0.0045  0.0644  0.0616  0.5524  0.18
Cortot 1951   13  0.5333  0.0030  0.0731  0.1714  0.2921  0.22
Csalog 1996   28  0.4952  0.0028  0.0724  0.2941  0.0728  0.14
Czerny 1989   30  0.489  0.0212  0.149  0.4828  0.2612  0.35
Ezaki 2006   9  0.5417  0.0123  0.1023  0.3142  0.0627  0.14
Falvay 1989   6  0.5611  0.015  0.155  0.5934  0.1115  0.25
Fiorentino 1962   48  0.4251  0.0053  0.0643  0.0655  0.0552  0.05
Fliere 1977   29  0.4937  0.0032  0.0830  0.1735  0.0831  0.12
Fou 1978   15  0.5225  0.0033  0.0732  0.1448  0.0637  0.09
Francois 1956   56  0.3728  0.0051  0.0548  0.0530  0.2436  0.11
Goldenweiser 1946   45  0.4247  0.0054  0.0554  0.0556  0.0548  0.05
Gornostaeva 1994   54  0.3915  0.0149  0.0642  0.0641  0.0746  0.06
Groot 1988   39  0.4455  0.0044  0.0550  0.0549  0.0553  0.05
Hatto 1993   38  0.4462  0.0055  0.0358  0.0360  0.0465  0.03
Hatto 1997   43  0.4363  0.0056  0.0455  0.0451  0.0560  0.04
Horszowski 1983   50  0.4114  0.0134  0.0737  0.0750  0.0542  0.06
Indjic 2001   33  0.4653  0.0057  0.0359  0.0359  0.0464  0.03
Katin 1996   10  0.5340  0.0027  0.0625  0.2750  0.0630  0.13
Kiepura 1999   61  0.3048  0.0062  0.0265  0.0256  0.0562  0.03
Korecka 1992   55  0.3864  0.0064  0.0362  0.0344  0.0657  0.04
Kushner 1990   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Lilamand 2001   58  0.3554  0.0048  0.0547  0.0550  0.0549  0.05
Luisada 1990   25  0.5026  0.0018  0.0916  0.3942  0.0626  0.15
Luisada 2008   51  0.4124  0.0016  0.1018  0.3621  0.3313  0.34
Lushtak 2004   32  0.4622  0.0020  0.0919  0.3630  0.1617  0.24
Malcuzynski 1951   35  0.4529  0.0037  0.0738  0.0729  0.1835  0.11
Malcuzynski 1961   12  0.5313  0.0113  0.1113  0.4539  0.0723  0.18
Magaloff 1977   22  0.5023  0.0036  0.1234  0.1239  0.0639  0.08
Magin 1975   23  0.5018  0.0022  0.1420  0.3550  0.0529  0.13
Meguri 1997   46  0.4261  0.0058  0.0456  0.0451  0.0559  0.04
Milkina 1970   4  0.576  0.036  0.166  0.5715  0.462  0.51
Mohovich 1999   24  0.5038  0.0021  0.1315  0.4032  0.1518  0.24
Nezu 2005   31  0.4739  0.0047  0.0740  0.0755  0.0451  0.05
Ohlsson 1999   26  0.492  0.163  0.227  0.5618  0.463  0.51
Olejniczak 1990   41  0.4449  0.0046  0.0646  0.0653  0.0454  0.05
Osinska 1989   2  0.604  0.042  0.292  0.6711  0.541  0.60
Perlemuter 1992   53  0.4050  0.0065  0.0357  0.0341  0.0555  0.04
Poblocka 1999   7  0.5512  0.0119  0.0917  0.3745  0.0625  0.15
Rangell 2001   37  0.4542  0.0042  0.0553  0.0535  0.0847  0.06
Richter 1960   36  0.4536  0.0041  0.0641  0.0655  0.0550  0.05
Richter 1961   59  0.3267  0.0060  0.0361  0.0356  0.0556  0.04
Rosen 1989   49  0.4159  0.0052  0.0645  0.0641  0.0744  0.06
Rubinstein 1939   3  0.577  0.039  0.134  0.6018  0.424  0.50
Rubinstein 1952   27  0.4927  0.0011  0.1410  0.4718  0.409  0.43
Rubinstein 1966   17  0.5210  0.024  0.243  0.6022  0.368  0.46
Rudanovskaya 2007   8  0.5532  0.0025  0.0826  0.2629  0.1722  0.21
Shebanova 2002   18  0.5131  0.007  0.148  0.5123  0.3310  0.41
Smith 1975   34  0.4616  0.0138  0.0736  0.0738  0.0840  0.07
Sztompka 1959   5  0.5630  0.0017  0.1112  0.4515  0.487  0.46
Tanyel 1992   63  0.2466  0.0067  0.0167  0.0163  0.0366  0.02
Tsujii 2005   11  0.5357  0.0035  0.0835  0.0856  0.0543  0.06
Uninsky 1959   14  0.5343  0.0029  0.0729  0.2144  0.0634  0.11
Vardi 1988   44  0.4320  0.0039  0.0549  0.0554  0.0458  0.04
Wasowski 1980   19  0.513  0.0624  0.0827  0.2617  0.5011  0.36
Zimerman 1975   62  0.2865  0.0063  0.0264  0.0262  0.0367  0.02
Average   1  0.651  0.471  0.461  0.7538  0.0816  0.24
Random 1   67  0.0234  0.0066  0.0266  0.0249  0.0463  0.03
Random 2   64  0.1145  0.0059  0.0360  0.035  0.5132  0.12
Random 3   66  0.0544  0.0061  0.0363  0.035  0.5133  0.12

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).