Indjic 2001

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   7  0.7322  0.006  0.1411  0.557  0.575  0.56
Ashkenazy 1981   4  0.757  0.003  0.373  0.7914  0.523  0.64
Beliavsky 2004   48  0.638  0.0035  0.0645  0.0639  0.0652  0.06
BenOr 1989   10  0.7232  0.0017  0.1516  0.4746  0.0722  0.18
Biret 1990   30  0.684  0.0043  0.0835  0.0837  0.0839  0.08
Blet 2003   22  0.6945  0.0033  0.0833  0.0829  0.1833  0.12
Block 1995   40  0.6625  0.0049  0.0739  0.0741  0.0745  0.07
Brailowsky 1960   59  0.5861  0.0061  0.0653  0.0659  0.0458  0.05
Chiu 1999   21  0.6950  0.0011  0.137  0.5730  0.2212  0.35
Clidat 1994   45  0.6458  0.0048  0.0738  0.0760  0.0460  0.05
Cohen 1997   37  0.6713  0.0019  0.0930  0.172  0.7810  0.36
Coop 1987   15  0.7062  0.0015  0.1512  0.5238  0.0916  0.22
Cortot 1951   42  0.6520  0.0056  0.0558  0.0533  0.1046  0.07
Czerny 1949   55  0.6054  0.0055  0.0462  0.0457  0.0564  0.04
Czerny 1949b   46  0.6446  0.0039  0.0742  0.0745  0.0743  0.07
Ezaki 2006   14  0.703  0.0022  0.0827  0.2743  0.0926  0.16
Falvay 1989   9  0.7342  0.0018  0.1215  0.4735  0.1115  0.23
Ferenczy 1958   58  0.5963  0.0059  0.0559  0.0549  0.0659  0.05
Fiorentino 1962   39  0.6651  0.0041  0.0647  0.0647  0.0656  0.06
Fliere 1977   11  0.7236  0.008  0.176  0.6130  0.2011  0.35
Fou 1978   25  0.6814  0.0027  0.1322  0.3248  0.0630  0.14
Francois 1956   57  0.6017  0.0053  0.0463  0.047  0.6029  0.15
Hatto 1997   1  0.981  1.001  0.981  1.001  1.001  1.00
Horowitz 1971   56  0.6047  0.0054  0.0561  0.0564  0.0365  0.04
Horowitz 1985   62  0.4943  0.0062  0.0560  0.0560  0.0557  0.05
Indjic 2001   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Kapell 1951   16  0.7010  0.0025  0.1020  0.3741  0.0824  0.17
Kiepura 1999   44  0.6537  0.0057  0.0743  0.0754  0.0548  0.06
Kilenyi 1937   50  0.6321  0.0044  0.0740  0.0747  0.0744  0.07
Kissin 1993   18  0.7026  0.0012  0.1210  0.5552  0.0525  0.17
Kitain 1937   63  0.3959  0.0063  0.0652  0.0646  0.0562  0.05
Kushner 1990   52  0.6255  0.0051  0.0555  0.0564  0.0363  0.04
Levy 1951   43  0.6529  0.0040  0.0737  0.0737  0.0740  0.07
Luisada 1990   34  0.6756  0.0045  0.0648  0.0638  0.1038  0.08
Lushtak 2004   24  0.6918  0.0029  0.0929  0.2030  0.1920  0.19
Lympany 1968   35  0.6734  0.0038  0.0649  0.0634  0.0749  0.06
Magaloff 1977   27  0.6823  0.0030  0.1028  0.2249  0.0634  0.11
Magaloff 1977b   28  0.6864  0.0028  0.1026  0.2735  0.0927  0.16
Magin 1975   33  0.6739  0.0050  0.0554  0.0542  0.0942  0.07
Milkina 1970   3  0.772  0.004  0.224  0.767  0.672  0.71
Mohovich 1999   19  0.709  0.0013  0.1514  0.4827  0.378  0.42
Nadelmann 1956   31  0.6848  0.0021  0.1025  0.2835  0.0731  0.14
Ohlsson 1999   29  0.6815  0.0034  0.0834  0.0833  0.0937  0.08
Olejniczac 1990   38  0.6757  0.0042  0.0646  0.0648  0.0653  0.06
Olejniczak 1991   41  0.6540  0.0047  0.0736  0.0748  0.0741  0.07
Osinska 1989   8  0.7335  0.0014  0.1313  0.5149  0.0719  0.19
Paderewski 1912   53  0.6130  0.0036  0.0557  0.0535  0.0854  0.06
Perahia 1994   51  0.6224  0.0031  0.0831  0.167  0.5513  0.30
Perlemuter 1986   20  0.7031  0.0016  0.1518  0.437  0.626  0.52
Poblocka 1999   12  0.7149  0.0023  0.0819  0.4139  0.0821  0.18
Rangell 2001   17  0.7012  0.0024  0.1021  0.3734  0.1118  0.20
Risler 1920   61  0.5438  0.0058  0.0741  0.0747  0.0651  0.06
Rosen 1989   54  0.6019  0.0060  0.0644  0.0657  0.0461  0.05
Rubinstein 1939   49  0.6365  0.0037  0.0556  0.0516  0.4328  0.15
Rubinstein 1952   36  0.6733  0.0032  0.0732  0.1458  0.0447  0.07
Rubinstein 1966   6  0.745  0.0010  0.149  0.579  0.604  0.58
Rummel 1943   60  0.5711  0.0052  0.0650  0.0641  0.0655  0.06
Shebanova 2002   5  0.746  0.005  0.185  0.6216  0.447  0.52
Smith 1975   23  0.6944  0.007  0.138  0.5738  0.0817  0.21
Szpilman 1948   47  0.6427  0.0046  0.0651  0.0641  0.0750  0.06
Uninsky 1971   32  0.6816  0.0020  0.0924  0.2941  0.0632  0.13
Wasowski 1980   13  0.7141  0.009  0.1317  0.4524  0.379  0.41
Weissenberg 1971   26  0.6860  0.0026  0.1023  0.3037  0.1023  0.17
Average   2  0.8228  0.002  0.802  0.9344  0.0714  0.26
Random 1    66  -0.0252  0.0066  0.0166  0.0143  0.0466  0.02
Random 2   64  0.0366  0.0064  0.0364  0.037  0.4435  0.11
Random 3   65  0.0053  0.0065  0.0265  0.027  0.5536  0.10

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).