Random 3

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   6  0.0013  0.0110  0.0911  0.4665  0.0210  0.10
Ashkenazy 1981   13  -0.0134  0.0017  0.1016  0.3364  0.0216  0.08
Beliavsky 2004   32  -0.0339  0.0024  0.0721  0.2465  0.0220  0.07
BenOr 1989   48  -0.0417  0.0134  0.0534  0.0565  0.0245  0.03
Biret 1990   44  -0.0462  0.0059  0.0358  0.0365  0.0265  0.02
Blet 2003   37  -0.0345  0.0053  0.0443  0.0465  0.0238  0.03
Block 1995   56  -0.0535  0.0051  0.0356  0.0365  0.0262  0.02
Brailowsky 1960   34  -0.038  0.0125  0.0725  0.2065  0.0224  0.06
Chiu 1999   18  -0.0230  0.0013  0.109  0.4865  0.028  0.10
Clidat 1994   55  -0.0543  0.0055  0.0438  0.0465  0.0240  0.03
Cohen 1997   14  -0.0155  0.0042  0.0445  0.0465  0.0243  0.03
Coop 1987   57  -0.0560  0.0056  0.0350  0.0365  0.0254  0.02
Cortot 1951   8  0.009  0.014  0.224  0.6065  0.026  0.11
Czerny 1949   27  -0.0311  0.0135  0.0437  0.0465  0.0239  0.03
Czerny 1949b   21  -0.0236  0.0029  0.0726  0.1665  0.0225  0.06
Ezaki 2006   63  -0.0764  0.0064  0.0264  0.0265  0.0247  0.02
Falvay 1989   46  -0.0444  0.0032  0.0532  0.1065  0.0230  0.04
Ferenczy 1958   64  -0.0749  0.0062  0.0262  0.0265  0.0258  0.02
Fiorentino 1962   23  -0.0237  0.0038  0.0440  0.0465  0.0244  0.03
Fliere 1977   45  -0.0450  0.0054  0.0348  0.0365  0.0248  0.02
Fou 1978   38  -0.0332  0.0041  0.0436  0.0465  0.0235  0.03
Francois 1956   43  -0.0422  0.0023  0.0824  0.2065  0.0226  0.06
Hatto 1997   10  0.0023  0.0011  0.128  0.5064  0.029  0.10
Horowitz 1971   11  0.0019  0.0116  0.1015  0.3565  0.0218  0.08
Horowitz 1985   5  0.0014  0.019  0.1013  0.4065  0.0212  0.09
Indjic 2001   9  0.0026  0.008  0.157  0.5564  0.0211  0.10
Kapell 1951   40  -0.0454  0.0039  0.0442  0.0465  0.0236  0.03
Kiepura 1999   4  0.007  0.015  0.146  0.5564  0.027  0.10
Kilenyi 1937   42  -0.0421  0.0021  0.0819  0.2665  0.0221  0.07
Kissin 1993   59  -0.0556  0.0046  0.0352  0.0365  0.0255  0.02
Kitain 1937   16  -0.0116  0.0118  0.0918  0.3065  0.0217  0.08
Kushner 1990   35  -0.0328  0.0040  0.0441  0.0465  0.0237  0.03
Levy 1951   7  0.0012  0.017  0.193  0.6064  0.024  0.11
Luisada 1990   33  -0.0340  0.0036  0.0535  0.0565  0.0241  0.03
Lushtak 2004   62  -0.0759  0.0061  0.0260  0.0265  0.0261  0.02
Lympany 1968   31  -0.0329  0.0027  0.0628  0.1465  0.0227  0.05
Magaloff 1977   53  -0.0433  0.0048  0.0347  0.0365  0.0259  0.02
Magaloff 1977b   47  -0.0415  0.0143  0.0446  0.0465  0.0242  0.03
Magin 1975   58  -0.0542  0.0060  0.0444  0.0465  0.0234  0.03
Milkina 1970   24  -0.0247  0.0031  0.0430  0.1065  0.0231  0.04
Mohovich 1999   41  -0.0425  0.0052  0.0353  0.0365  0.0263  0.02
Nadelmann 1956   29  -0.0351  0.0030  0.0531  0.1065  0.0232  0.04
Ohlsson 1999   19  -0.026  0.0212  0.1112  0.4465  0.0213  0.09
Olejniczac 1990   36  -0.0358  0.0049  0.0357  0.0365  0.0260  0.02
Olejniczak 1991   52  -0.045  0.0250  0.0354  0.0365  0.0252  0.02
Osinska 1989   61  -0.0665  0.0063  0.0263  0.0265  0.0249  0.02
Paderewski 1912   17  -0.0210  0.0119  0.1022  0.2464  0.0222  0.07
Perahia 1994   25  -0.0227  0.0015  0.0920  0.2565  0.0223  0.07
Perlemuter 1986   12  -0.0152  0.0014  0.1014  0.4065  0.0214  0.09
Poblocka 1999   50  -0.0453  0.0057  0.0261  0.0265  0.0250  0.02
Rangell 2001   39  -0.0320  0.0045  0.0351  0.0364  0.0264  0.02
Risler 1920   22  -0.0241  0.0020  0.0717  0.3065  0.0215  0.08
Rosen 1989   54  -0.0438  0.0026  0.0729  0.1465  0.0229  0.05
Rubinstein 1939   3  0.014  0.033  0.195  0.5764  0.025  0.11
Rubinstein 1952   26  -0.0348  0.0037  0.0439  0.0465  0.0246  0.03
Rubinstein 1966   30  -0.0361  0.0044  0.0355  0.0365  0.0257  0.02
Rummel 1943   20  -0.023  0.056  0.1810  0.4663  0.033  0.12
Shebanova 2002   15  -0.0124  0.0028  0.0627  0.1565  0.0228  0.05
Smith 1975   51  -0.0418  0.0147  0.0349  0.0365  0.0251  0.02
Szpilman 1948   28  -0.0331  0.0022  0.0823  0.2265  0.0219  0.07
Uninsky 1971   60  -0.0557  0.0058  0.0359  0.0365  0.0256  0.02
Wasowski 1980   49  -0.0446  0.0033  0.0533  0.0565  0.0233  0.03
Weissenberg 1971   65  -0.0863  0.0065  0.0265  0.0265  0.0253  0.02
Random 1    2  0.032  0.302  0.492  0.691  0.561  0.62
Random 2   1  0.081  0.381  0.381  0.7422  0.322  0.49
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).